Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Greenock Burgh Extension, etc., Bill,

Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to.

Liverpool Corporation Bill [Lords] (by Order),

Order for Consideration, as amended, read;

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered":

Question amended, by leaving out from the word "That," to the word "be," and inserting the words "although the allowance of a term of eighty years for the repayment of certain loans is contrary to Standing Order l73a of this House, this House, having regard to the special circumstances mentioned in the Report of the Committee, orders the Bill to,"—[The Chairman of Ways and Means,"]—instead thereof,—and, as amended, agreed to.

Bill, as amended, considered accordingly; Amendments made to the Bill; Bill to be read the Third time.

Glasgow Corporation Order Confirmation Bill,

Considered; to be read the Third time To-morrow.

Oral Answers to Questions — NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.

BRITISH EMPIRE SERVICE LEAGUE.

Viscount SANDON: 1.
asked the Minister of Pensions if he can give the results of the conferences between both himself and his Department and representatives
of the British Empire Services League?

The MINISTER of PENSIONS (Major Tryon): Representatives of the British Empire Service League discussed with me various matters relating to pensioners resident in the Dominions, and gave me the opportunity of explaining the position of my Department in regard to them. Subsequently, certain members of the Deputation had interviews with officers of the Department on various details of procedure. As a result of these discussions, some difficulties have been removed, and a few improvements have been made, for instance, in the procedure for appeals to the Pensions Appeal Tribunals by pensioners resident overseas. The members concerned intimated that these interviews had been very helpful to them, and they were also of real benefit to my Department.

CHILDREN'S PENSIONS.

Miss LAWRENCE: 2.
asked the Minister of Pensions whether he has received complaints from the West Ham Pensions Committee with regard to the Poor Law relief given in West Ham to the parents of pensioned children; and the terms of the communication and the answer given?

Major TRYON: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Committee were informed that the question had been referred to the Minister of Health as a matter within his province, and that, in reply, the Minister of Health had pointed out that it was the duty of the guardians, in determining what amount of relief should be afforded in any particular case, to take into consideration the whole of the resources of the applicant's household, from whatever source derived, with certain statutory exceptions, which do not include pensions to children of fathers killed in the War, and that he has no power to give any discretion to the guardians in the matter.

Miss LAWRENCE: 3.
asked the Minister of Pensions whether, in regard to the letter from his Department, dated 16th November, 1922, addressed to Mr. Cribb, 12, Prestbury Road, E.12, stating that the pensions paid to the children of a deceased soldier must be devoted solely
to their benefit, he will say whether any and, if so, what action is taken by his Department to enforce this policy?

Major TRYON: I am unable to trace the correspondence referred to. I may say, however, that the allowance paid to the parent of a child is designed to provide for the entire maintenance of the child. I am bound to assume that the allowance is normally applied by parents in this manner in the interests of their children, though, in the exceptional event of a case being brought to notice in which the child was found to be suffering seriously from want of proper care by the parent, it would be considered whether the allowance could with advantage be administered, otherwise than by way of payment to the parent, in the interests of the child.

Miss LAWRENCE: If the sole income of a family is derived from pensions of fatherless children of soldiers, is it the opinion of the Minister of Health that part of such pensions which have been granted to the children can properly be used to support their step-brothers and step-fathers; and, if not, will the right hon. Gentleman communicate again with the Minister of Health?

Major TRYON: That supplementary question, obviously, refers to the administration of another Department, and, therefore, it would not be in order for me to reply to it.

Miss LAWRENCE: I understand that these pensions are under the oversight of the Minister of Pensions, and I ask him whether he concurs in an arrangement by which pensions granted by the country to the fatherless children of soldiers who died in the War can be devoted to the support of their step-brothers and stepfathers?

Major TRYON: I am certainly not prepared to appoint inspectors to intervene in the affairs of about 500,000 families, but, if any case is brought to my notice in which a child is being neglected, I will go into it, as I have already informed the hon. Member.

Mr. T. KENNEDY: Is it not the business of the Ministry of Pensions to see that moneys paid in the form of allowances
for the maintenance of children are applied to the purpose for which they are paid?

Major TRYON: I am not prepared to adopt the suggestion from the opposite benches that I should interfere in the accounts of all these families, but, as I have said, if any child is not being properly looked after, I shall intervene.

Miss LAWRENCE: Will the Ministry conduct an inquiry on the representations of the West Ham Pensions Committee, who have written to the Minister of Pensions to complain in regard to this matter?

Major TRYON: I shall certainly not conduct an inquiry into the administration of another Department.

Major COLFOX: As this question obviously refers to an individual case—

Miss LAWRENCE: No!

Major COLFOX: —will the Minister consider that case when it is brought definitely before him?

Major TRYON: Certainly. If any individual case is brought definitely before me in which a child can be shown to [...] suffering, I shall go into it.

TRAFFIC IN WOMEN.

Viscount SANDON: 4.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Government contemplate any changes in the law as to the traffic in women; whether he has considered the proposals set out in Bill 152 of this Session; and his attitude towards the proposed abolition of the flogging penalty?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir William Joynson-Hicks): The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second and third parts, the proposals in the Bill will, of course, be considered, but it would not be usual for me to express any opinion on these proposals in anticipation of discussion of the Bill in this House.

Viscount SANDON: Will the right hon. Gentleman take care that he does not weaken on this question of flogging?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: The right hon. Gentleman is not given to much weakness.

SEXUAL OFFENCES AGAINST YOUNG PERSONS.

Viscount SANDON: 3.
asked the Home Secretary whether he can now make any statement as to possible legislative action arising out of the Report of the Committee on Sexual Offences against Young Parsons, now that the Report on Youthful Offenders has been out for some time?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I am not yet in a position to make any statement as to proposals for legislation. The two Reports referred to cover very wide fields, and raise various questions that require, and are receiving, careful consideration.

Viscount SANDON: Will the right lion. Gentleman still be sitting on this question in the autumn, or can I put a further question then?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I am perfectly open to sit on it in the autumn if necessary, but, as I intend to devote most of my exiguous holiday to the study of these Reports, I hope it will not be necessary.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Has the right hon. Gentleman come to any conclusion as to whether a Bill of this kind should include Scotland; and is he consulting the Secretary of State for Scotland on this subject?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: Obviously, I cannot say, until I have arrived at a considered opinion upon the Reports, whether it is desirable to extend the operation of the Bill to Scotland.

INCOME TAX (ARREST FOR NON-PAYMENT).

Colonel DAY: 6.
asked the Home Secretary whether he has now had an opportunity of consulting with the various authorities so that arrangements may be made to enable a person arrested on a Saturday for non-compliance with a judgment order for the payment of a debt in respect of Income Tax on payment of the amount owing to be released previous to the following Monday?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I am still in consultation with the authorities concerned.

Colonel DAY: Could the right hon. Gentleman arrange for the Governor of any prison to receive the money when a person is arrested?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I am still in consultation with the sheriffs, who are the authorities responsible in the matter, and, until I get some definite opinion from them, I cannot make any arrangements.

Major COLFOX: Would not all this trouble be prevented if the hon. Gentleman opposite persuaded his friends to pay their just debts?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: A good deal of it might be.

Colonel DAY: May I ask, Mr. Speaker, whether it is correct for an hon. Member opposite to suggest that persons who do not pay their debts are friends of mine?

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

MOTOR VEHICLES (NOISE).

Sir ROBERT THOMAS: 7.
asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that his warning, issued to motorists last year, that they must more effectively silence their machines, has not produced any appreciable diminution in the noisiness of a great many machines; and whether he will take further action in the matter?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: The hon. Member may be interested to know that, in the first six months of this year, there were over 5,700 prosecutions in the Metropolitan Police District. I hope they have not been entirely without effect. In any event, the police will continue to take such steps as are possible to abate the nuisance in so fat as it still exists.

Sir R. THOMAS: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that these infernal, screeching motor syrens are causing intense mental anguish to hundreds of patients in nursing homes in London, even to the extent, in some cases, of causing death; and does he not realise that it is time for him to take drastic action in the matter?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I do not know what more drastic action I can take than prosecuting 5,700 people in six months. I may say that my definite
instructions to the police are that they should do their utmost to stop noise, in the case either of motor cycles or of motor cars.

Sir R. THOMAS: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are tens of thousands of motor cyclists and motor drivers in London, and why should he confine himself to 5,000?

PROSECUTION, CAMBUSLANG.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: 53.
asked the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been called to the case of a man who was reported as long ago as 25th April for recklessly driving a motor car at Cambuslang while under the influence of liquor; and why in this case the trial was postponed until 13th July?

The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. William Watson): The case referred to by the hon. Member was first reported to the procurator fiscal on 28th April, and on 2nd June the accused was cited to appear on 8th June. The case was dealt with in ordinary course, and owing to pressure of other business and to the fact that cases in which the accused is in custody are given precedence over those in which, as in the case in question, the accused is not in custody, the procurator fiscal was unable to have the case brought before the Court at an earlier date. The case was adjourned by the Court to 13th July at the request of the accused, and on that date was further adjourned to the 21st July on production of a medical certificate that the accused was unable to attend Court.

TRAVELLING FACILITIES, NORTH AND NORTH-EAST LONDON.

Captain WALLACE: 61.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he has now considered the scheme submitted to him by the London Traffic Advisory Committee for dealing with the problem of travelling facilities in North and North-East London; whether he has reached any conclusions; and what action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter?

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): As my hon. and gallant Friend is aware, the problem of finding some means for co-ordinating passenger transport services in the London area with a view to the elimination
of unnecessary and wasteful competition is engaging close attention at the present time.

Captain WALLACE: Are we to take it that the London Traffic Advisory Committee have not submitted any scheme at all to my right hon. Friend?

Colonel ASHLEY: Not so far, but I hope to have a report in my hands before the end of the week.

Sir FREDRIC WISE: Have the conditions of railway travelling between Liverpool Street and Ilford been considered?

Colonel ASHLEY: Oh, yes, all that area has been considered.

Mr. HARRIS: Is it not the policy of the London Traffic Advisory Committee to make a complete combine or trust, and will the right hon. Gentleman protect the travelling public from getting into the hands of a traffic combine?

Colonel ASHLEY: The hon. Member can rely upon my doing everything to protect the travelling public.

OMNIBUSES, GLASGOW (ACCIDENTS).

Mr. STEPHEN: 62.
asked the Minister of Transport the number of omnibuses in use in Glasgow and district and the number of accidents, fatal and otherwise. respectively, in Glasgow for which this traffic was responsible during the first six months of this year?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am making inquiries to ascertain whether the information asked for by the hon. Member is available, and will let him know the result.

COAL (LOW TEMPERATURE CARBONISATION).

Sir R. THOMAS: 16.
asked the President of the Board of Education what progress is being made by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research in the development of a method of low-temperature carbonisation of coal which will provide a Home source of fuel oil and allow the production commercially of a smokeless fuel for domestic grates?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Lord Eustace Percy): As the hon. Member will readily understand, it is not possible within the limits of an answer to a question to give any adequate
account of an industrial process. I would, however, refer him to the statement made in this House by the Parliamentary Secretary on 11th May, and to the Report of the Fuel Research Board published a few days ago by the Stationery Office. I think he will gather from these two sources all the information that he desires.

Oral Answers to Questions — EDUCATION.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES' ESTIMATES (CIRCULAR 1,388).

Mr. ROBERT RICHARDSON: 20
asked the President of the Board of Education, (1) how many authorities have been required to reduce their estimates as a result of Circular 1,388; and what is the total amount of such reductions under each of the following headings, namely: administration and other expenditure (elementary), secondary education and aid to students, and administration (higher education);
(2) if he will state the names of the six authorities whose reductions have been greatest in proportion to their estimates; and what is the amount of the reduction in each case under the three headings, and
(3) what are the names of the authorities which have been required to give up or postpone a proposal to establish a special school?

Lord E. PERCY: The Board have intimated to nine authorities that they are not yet satisfied that they would be justified in recognising for grant so large an expenditure as was proposed by the authority under the heading "Administration and Other Expenditure (Elementary)," and they have given a similar intimation to two authorities in regard to the heading "Administration (Higher Education)." The amount of the reductions considered necessary has not been specified. As regards special schools, no authorities have, since the issue of Circular 1388, been required to abandon proposals, but the authorities for Guildford, Hove, Lincoln, and West Ham have been requested to postpone for the present proposals to make such provision during the current year.

SIZE OF CLASSES (SCOTLAND).

Mr. BUCHANAN: 50.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of
children per class attending schools in the towns of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee, Aberdeen, Greenock, and Perth?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Major Elliot): For the year ended 31st July, 1926, the average attendance of children per class in primary schools, including preparatory departments and advanced divisions, was as follows:


Glasgow
…
…
47


Edinburgh
…
…
38


Dundee
…
…
36


Aberdeen
…
…
39


Separate particulars for Greenock and Perth are not available, but the corresponding figures for the education areas within which they are situated were 34 and 24 respectively.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman give any reason for the exceptionally high figures for Glasgow?

Major ELLIOT: I am afraid I cannot within the limits of question and answer. The hon. Member is well acquainted with the congestion and overcrowding and other factors, in taking over the schools in Glasgow recently, which account for the high figures.

Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the fact that school accommodation is one of the big questions in Glasgow, will the hon. and gallant Gentleman take steps to secure an early settlement of the problem?

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member knows that the Secretary of State has this matter under consideration, and he has already replied to one or two Parliamentary questions on the subject.

Mr. SHEPHERD: Are the figures based on the number of children on the books or on the average attendance?

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member will see by the questions put down that it is the number of children attending.

Mr. STEPHEN: 51.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he intends to take to arrange for the reduction of classes in Scottish elementary schools to 50 or under, in view of the fact that there are teachers unemployed whose services could be utilised to secure improvement in this respect in most areas?

Major ELLIOT: In accordance with the notice given in the Prefatory Memorandum to the Regulations for the Training of Teachers, issued in June, 1924, the present provisional maximum of 60 pupils per class will be lowered to a maximum of 50 as from 1st September, 1928.

Mr. STEPHEN: Can we take it, from the figures which have been given, that the Secretary of State for Scotland will press on the Glasgow Education Authorities the importance of employing some of these techers, and reducing the classes.

Major ELLIOT: That is a matter which my right hon. Friend has very prominently in his mind.

Mr. W. THORNE: Will the Under-Secretary convey that information to the President of the Board of Education?

Major ELLIOT: My right hon. Friend is in constant communication with the President of the Board of Education.

SCHOOL-LEAVING AGE.

Mr. SOMERVILLE (for Mr. CAMPBELL): 17.
asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is in a position to make a statement as to the future policy of His Majesty's Government in regard to the raising of the school-leaving age?

Lord E. PERCY: The policy of His Majesty's Government remains the same as that which they have consistently followed since they assumed office. They made it clear, in various statements and answers to questions during the first Session of the present Parliament, that they would consider, on its merits, any proposal made by a Local Education Authority to raise the school-leaving age by local by-law under the powers conferred upon Authorities by the Education Act, but that they were not prepared, in existing circumstances, to impose on the country the additional financial burdens which would be entailed by a general raising of the age. His Majesty's Government have seen no reason to depart from the policy thus defined, especially since both the Consultative Committee of the Board and the Association of Education Committees have recently expressed the opinion that Local Authorities cannot, in any case, be ready to provide generally for the proper education of children between 14
and 15 before the year 1932 or 1933. The Consultative Committee has, indeed, recommended that anticipatory legislation raising the school-leaving age as from September, 1932, should be passed immediately, but as my hon. Friend knows, I have already stated, both in this House and elsewhere, that His Majesty's Government are unable to accept this recommendation.

Mr. BOOTHBY: Have any local authorities applied?

Lord E. PERCY: Yes, Carnarvon and East Suffolk did apply, and their by-laws were approved at the end of 1924. Plymouth and Cornwall have now applied.

Mr. HARRIS: Is the Board of Education anxious to get schemes prepared by local authorities in order to see what their ideas are? Would they favour schemes being worked out as to cost and whether buildings are available?

Lord E. PERCY: Yes, I have suggested to the local authorities that in view of the Consultative Committee's report, they should work out some survey of the cost, and local authorities are surveying their probable needs in that direction.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, if there is a change in the Board of Education, there will be a change of policy?

Lord E. PERCY: I am not aware of that.

Mr. THORNE: There will be.

Mr. SHEPHERD: Is the President of the Board of Education aware that the raising of the school-leaving age would have an enormous effect upon unemployment?

Lord E. PERCY: No, Sir. I am not aware of that, and I think that statement is very largely fallacious. I think, if the hon. Member will examine the actual conditions of any particular industry, he will find that in the case of the withdrawal of children between the ages of 14 and 15 the effect on the total employment in the industry at best would be very indirect, but in any case from the educational point of view the question is whether we should compel children to attend school admittedly before we are prepared to give them a proper education.

Oral Answers to Questions — PUBLIC HEALTH.

WEST MIDDLESEX HOSPITAL (INQUEST).

Colonel DAY: 23.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the complaint made by the coroner at an inquest held on Horace Henry Phillips at Isleworth to the effect that there had been slackness in preparing the patient for an operation at the Brentford Guardians' West Middlesex Hospital; and whether he has taken any action?

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Chamberlain): Yes, Sir. The hon. Member is no doubt aware that the slackness to which the coroner drew attention was found not to be a contributory cause of death. The medical superintendent has taken steps which should be effective in securing proper administration in the future, and I do not propose to take any further action.

Colonel DAY: What are those steps to be taken by the medical superintendent.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: A rearrangement of the rules.

BRENTWOOD MENTAL HOSPITAL (LOAN).

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD-BURY: 26.
asked the Minister of Health whether he can state his reasons for withholding his sanction for the loan to be raised to supply the plant for the generating of electricity for the Brentwood (Essex) Mental Hospital; whether he is aware that this scheme was unanimously passed by the Essex County Council and the Borough of Colchester and can be proved to be the most economical; that his commissioners have complained and reported on the leakage of gas that can be continuously detected when visiting the institution; and whether he is in favour of the only alternative, that of refitting the whole of the institution with new gas piping?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Before giving a decision upon the application for sanction to a loan in this case, I have directed one of my engineering inspectors to visit the mental hospital and report fully upon the scheme. This visit will be paid at an early date.

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD-BURY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at
present they are losing over £400 a year, and will he institute inquiries as soon as possible in view of the delay?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I was not aware that they were losing £400 a year, but it is obvious that before embarking on fresh capital expenditure we must be sure the scheme is a suitable one, and the visit of the inspector will be paid at an early date.

ENCEPHALITIS LETHARGICA (MR. NEWTON).

Mr. W. BAKER: 13.
asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that at the beginning of October last Mr. Newton, a telegraphist in the established service of the Government, was certified by a specialist to be suffering from sleeping sickness and was given a month's leave; that on 13th June last Mr. Newton was missing from his home at Manchester and, although full particulars were supplied to the police, who caused information to be published broadcast and inserted notices in the newspapers, he was charged at Longton with sleeping out and was sentenced to a month's imprisonment, without remand or police inquiry; that the first intimation received by Mrs. Newton was sent to her by the Governor of Strangeways Prison, who informed her that her husband would be released on 19th July; and whether, having regard to the dangers disclosed by this incident, he will cause prisoners showing symptoms of this disease to be specially reported upon by the prison doctor on arrival?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I am well aware of the facts of this case about which the hon. Member for Rusholme (Mr. Betterton) communicated with me a month ago. Newton was found by the Longton police asleep on a haystack with a filled pipe and matches. In Court he gave no information about himself, but said he came from Birmingham. Fortunately, the police, after he had been sentenced, gleaned some further information which they communicated to the prison governor. The prison governor reported to me and also sent me a report from the medical officer. I immediately arranged for the man's release, and he was returned to his friends on 25th June. The fact that the prison doctor sent the man to hospital and made a special report to the effect that he was probably suffering from encephalitis
lethargica shows that the care which the hon. Member desires is exercised in these cases.

INFANT MORTALITY (WEST AND EAST HAM).

Miss LAWRENCE: 27.
asked the Minister of Health the comparative figures of infant mortality for West and East Ham for the quarters ended, respectively, 30th June, 1926, and 30th June, 1927?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The provisional figures asked for by the hon. Member for the 13 weeks ending 3rd July, 1926, and 2nd July, 1927, are 45 and 57 and 40 and 47 per 1,000 for West Ham and East Ham, respectively. The figures for the separate months making up the period are—for West Ham 59, 46 and 32 in April, May and June, 1926, and 75, 54 and 44 in the same months of 1927; for East Ham, 25, 61 and 35 in 1926, and 100, 26 and 16 in 1927.

FOOD PRESERVATIVES REGULATIONS (CREAM).

Mr. LAMB: 29.
asked the Minister of Health whether it is his intention before enforcing the Public Health (Preservatives, etc., in Food) Regulations in respect to cream, to introduce the legislation necessary to prohibit the reconstitution of cream so as to give the public the same protection as they now enjoy in the case of milk?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am informed that It is not necessary to introduce legislation for this purpose, as the existing provisions of the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts would prevent the sale of reconstituted cream as cream. The Preservatives Regulations will apply to the substitute equally as to genuine cream.

Major COLFOX: In view of the fact that milk produced under unhygienic circumstances may be a very great danger to public health, what steps does my right hon. Friend intend to take to see that imported milk is produced under circumstances similar to those required in this country?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Perhaps my hon. Friend will give me notice of that question. It is quite different from the one on the Paper.

Mr. LAMB: Can my right hon. Friend say if any action is being taken by the authorities at all on the lines he has suggested, in view of the very large quantity of reconstituted cream now being sold?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If my hon. Friend means whether any proceedings have been taken against persons selling reconstituted cream as cream, I am unaware of any, and I do not know that it is sold as cream.

MILK AND DAIRIES ORDER.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: 31.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the fact that, as stated at a meeting of the Great Yarmouth Town Council, large numbers of milk retailers in the Borough of Yarmouth have not yet been registered; and what steps he proposes to take to see that the Milk and Dairies Order is enforced?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: My attention had not previously been drawn to this statement, but I am communicating with the town council on the subject.

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

SLUM CLEARANCE SCHEMES.

Mr. HARRIS: 25.
asked the Minister of Health what money has been allocated by the Treasury to assist slum clearance schemes; if there is any fixed figure provided for this purpose; and whether the £200,000 allocated as an annual grant to help slum clearance has in any one year been spent?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: No fixed allocation is made for Exchequer contributions towards the expenses of slum clearance schemes, the actual expenditure each year being dependent on the progress of the schemes sanctioned. The requirement for the year 1927–28, for which provision is included under the general housing grants subhead of the Vote for the Ministry, is estimated at £65,000.

Mr. HARRIS: Is it not a fact that in 1923 the Government allocated £200,000 for this purpose as an annual grant?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The £200,000 to which the hon. Member refers was the maximum expenditure that could be
devoted to this purpose. When the basis of the housing subsidy was altered in 1923, the limit was removed.

Mr. HARRIS: Then the limit has never been reached, and this year it is only £65,000?

WATFORD (BRICKLAYERS).

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: 30.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the provision of houses for the working classes in the Watford area is being delayed because of the shortage of bricklayers; whether this cause is responsible for the slow progress being made elsewhere with the erection of working-class houses; and if he will state what measures he proposes to take to cope with the difficulty?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I have inquired whether a shortage of bricklayers in the Watford area is retarding the progress of house building, and I am informed by the town council and the rural district council that they have experienced no difficulties in this respect.
The fact that over 217,000 houses were erected in England and Wales during the year ended in March last seems to indicate an improvement in the supply of skilled workers for house building and it is still made a condition of approval of housing schemes of local authorities that the contractors should employ a number of apprentices proportional to the number of building trade craftsmen employed on the schemes.

Mr. MONTAGUE: Does that answer imply that the Minister is now satisfied with the policy of the building trade unions in this matter?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: It only implies what it says.

Mr. THURTLE: Are we to understand from the Minister's reply that the suggestion contained in the first part of the question was entirely unfounded?

Viscountess ASTOR: Can the Minister say whether there is any real shortage among slaters throughout the country, and whether that has been keeping back houses for some years?

SUBSIDY HOUSES.

Mr. HARRIS (for Sir WILLIAM EDGE): 32.
asked the Minister of Health
if any Reports have reached his Department showing whether any council houses built with the aid of the subsidy have already been condemned as uninhabitable or have been subjected to such extensive repairs that their occupants have had to vacate the premises; and, if so, where these structures have been mainly erected?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot trace the receipt of any such Reports.

METROPOLITAN POLICE.

Mr. HARRIS: 9.
asked the Home Secretary whether, in fixing the quota of police for the Metropolis, the local authorities who make contributions to the cost of the same are in any way consulted both as to the cost and the number of police allocated to their areas?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: Careful consideration is given to the requirements of the various localities, but systematic consultation with so large a number of authorities would be quite impracticable.

Mr. HARRIS: Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that these local authorities have had their contributions very much raised in the last few years, particularly during his administration, and does he not think that under the circumstances they should have some knowledge of where the money is going and on what it is being spent?

Viscountess ASTOR: If careful consideration be given to local requirements, will the right hon. Gentleman see that they have more women police?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: Anyone can find out how the money is spent by looking at the Votes passed in the House, and any question of detail I shall be glad to answer, but I cannot take upon myself the duty of corresponding beforehand with every local authority unless I know there is a question they desire to raise. If there be a question, I shall be glad to answer it and to consult with them. With regard to the second supplementary, so far as the Metropolitan area is concerned I have already increased the number of women police, and I am shortly getting a report.

Viscountess ASTOR: Is it not true that in 1920 we had 112 women police in the Metropolitan area, and now we have only 42, and even in those days we had not enough?

Mr. SHEPHERD: Was the right hon. Gentleman consulted before extra police were drafted into Littlehampton last Sunday?

TAXIMETER CABS (FARES).

Mr. HURD: 10.
asked the Home Secretary if he is aware that the tariff of reduced fares is being shown in taximeter cabs in such a way as to be invisible to the passengers at night-time, and that in some cases drivers are demanding the fare marked on the meter without the legal deduction; and whether he will take steps to have the tariff of reduced fares placed so as to be more visible at night?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: Yes, Sir, I am aware of this difficulty, but I regret that it would not be easy to meet it without requiring cabs to be internally lit. On the whole, the position of the notice is as convenient as any that could be selected for the purpose and it is only a temporary one until the present meters can be altered. I may add that the modification of fares is now well known.

Mr. HURD: In any new arrangements that may be made, will the right hon. Gentleman take care that the fare properly demanded of the passenger is clearly marked on the meter and not put in such a way that he cannot really know what he has to pay?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: When the revision takes place I will communicate my hon. Friend's suggestion to the Chief Commissioner with a view to having a legible meter.

Mr. SNOWDEN: Are there not a few taxis on the street where the figures on the clock are very much larger, so that there is no difficulty, and, when the change is made, could he insist on the figures being larger than at present? Is he also aware that it is not merely a question of seeing in the dark, but that the light strikes the clock in such a way that even in daylight it is often difficult to see?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I am aware of the difficulty in regard to the figures. I have seen one or two that are quite legible, and, if possible, I will suggest to the Commissioner that a better type of taxi-meter should be used, as far as possible.

Sir F. HALL: Will the right hon. Gentleman defer a decision as to altering these taxi-meters until he has decided whether the present fares should continue or not? Is he aware that the change would cost a tremendous lot to the industry, and will he leave it in abeyance until the end of the year?

Lieut.-Colonel HOWARD-BURY: When are the new taxi-meters coming into force?

SIR W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I have received a deputation from London Members on that very subject, and have promised to give the matter consideration.

Sir JAMES REMNANT: Has the right hon. Gentleman any idea how much the conversion of the present meters to new meters showing the new scale of fares will cost?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I think about £24,000.

Mr. THURTLE: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that a large number of London Members were not consulted with regard to the deputation to which he referred?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: If the hon. Member desires to make any representation to me, I will carefully consider it.

LICENSED HOUSES (OPENING HOURS, LONDON).

Sir F. HALL: 14.
asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction which exists owing to the fact that licensed houses in certain parts of London are compelled to close at nine o'clock on Sunday evenings; and whether he is prepared to introduce legislation to put all the licensed houses in the Metropolis on the same basis, closing at 10 o'clock p.m.?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS: I regret that I am not prepared, without much further consideration, to let loose the floodgates of licensing legislation.

Sir F. HALL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that by adopting this method there will be a reduction of one hour of Sunday trading? On one side of Oxford Street they open at 6 and close at 9 and on the other side they open at 7 and close at 10. If they all opened at 7 and closed at 10, that would reduce it by an hour.

Mr. BUCHANAN: In view of the satisfactory experience of Sunday closing in Scotland, will the Government not adopt the same in England?

CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS ACT.

Mr. DALTON: 28.
asked the Minister of Health the amount of contributions for health insurance and for pensions

—
Health Insurance.
Pensions.


Contributions:
£
£


Employers
11,300,000
10,192,000


Employed
10,682,000
9,765,000


Payments by Exchequer
6,255,000
4,575,000


Amounts disbursed:


Maternity benefit
1,534,000
—


Sickness benefit
11,284,000
—


Disablement benefit
5,490,000
—


Pensions to widows (including additional allowance for children).
—
6,149,000


Pensions to orphans
—
257,000


Old Age Pensions to persons aged 70 and over, payable by virtue of the Contributory Pension Act from 2nd July, 1926.
—
1,575,000


Old Age Pensions at ages 65–70 become payable as from 2nd January, 1928.
—
—

Mr. HARRIS (for Sir W. EDGE): 33.
asked the Minister of Health whether a woman now over 70, and in receipt of some portion of the old age pension under the Old Age Pension Act, will, on her husband attaining 65 and qualifying to receive an old age pension under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act in January, automatically receive the full pension, irrespective of means, by reason of her husband's insurance?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The reply is in the affirmative.

under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act for the financial year ended 31st March, 1927, paid by the Exchequer, the employers, and the employed, respectively, and the amounts disbursed in maternity benefit, in sick and disablement benefit, in pensions to widows and orphans, and in old age pensions, respectively, under the above-mentioned Act during the same period?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: As the answer involves a number of figures I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

Statistics of health insurance for the financial year ended 31st March, 1927, are not available. The following statement gives the amounts as respects Great Britain for the calendar year ended 31st December, 1926, under the headings specified in the question:—

EXCESS PROFITS DUTY.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 35.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total number of claims still outstanding for the recovery of Excess Profits Duty, and at what figure does he estimate the total sum still to be claimed; and if he will take steps to get these claims settled and cleared up at the earliest possible opportunity, as many business houses are still waiting for these claims to be agreed?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): I am unable to furnish the number and estimate
asked for in the first part of the question. Every effort is being made to expedite the settlement of outstanding cases, and if my hon. and gallant Friend will let me have particulars of any case in which delay is alleged I shall arrange for inquiry to be made into the circumstances.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Is it the fact that a large number of applications have still to be dealt with, and what steps is he going to take to expedite them?

Mr. McNEILL: It is quite true that there are a large number of applications, and they are full of complicated details, but I can assure my hon. and gallant Friend that every expedition possible is being taken.

GOLD (SUPPLY AND DEMAND).

Lord HENRY CAVENDISH-BENTINCK: 36.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the fact that the world's annual requirements of new gold will be likely in the near future largely to exceed the available supply, he will consider taking steps to carry out the recommendation of the Genoa Economic Conference in 1922 by co-operating internationally to secure systematic limitation of the monetary demand for gold?

Mr. McNEILL: I would refer my Noble Friend to what my right hon. Friend said in the course of the discussion on the Treasury Vote on the 27th June.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

STATIONERY OFFICE (TYPEWRITERS).

Colonel DAY: 37.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the number of new typewriters at present in stock at the Stationery Office?

Mr. McNEILL: The number of new typewriters at present in stock is 216.

Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these are foreign and how many are British?

Mr. McNEILL: 156 of them are British.

Commander WILLIAMS: Can my right hon. Friend tell us how old they are?

Colonel WOODCOCK: Can my right hon. Friend say whether the 156 British typewriters are new ones just put in, and if they have commenced to use British instead of foreign typewriters?

Mr. McNEILL: I cannot say. I cannot give these particulars without notice.

CLERICAL STAFF (CALCULATING MACHINES).

Mr. ROBINSON: 38.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the expenditure of £30,000 on calculating and other machines for the use of Government Departments has reduced, or will result in any reduction in, the number of clerical staff?

Mr. McNEILL: Yes, Sir. Expenditure on calculating and other machines for use in Government Departments results in appreciable reductions in the numbers of clerical staff required.

Colonel DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of the staff will be displaced on account of their introduction?

Mr. McNEILL: No, Sir. You cannot earmark particular members of the clerical staff to so many machines.

Captain ARTHUR EVANS: Can my right hon. Friend say whether the members of the staff who will not be required owing to the introduction of these machines will be transferred to another Government Department, or whether they will be discharged?

Mr. McNEILL: I cannot say that without notice.

BOARD OF TRADE (SURVEYORS).

Mr. BUCHANAN: 60.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the number of ships cleared at ports in Great Britain has increased in recent years and that the number of inspectors employed to inspect them has decreased; and if he intends taking any steps to increase the number of inspectors to secure adequate inspection?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister): The figures given to the hon. Member on 18th July show that there has been a decrease in the number of surveyors and also, in the last period, in the number of vessels leaving the ports. I do not admit that inspection is inadequate; and
I think it is my duty to see that inspection is as economically conducted as is consistent with efficiency.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that fewer than 200 inspectors can efficiently inspect all the ships which clear at British ports each year?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: Yes, Sir, I do. I am satisfied that the economies which were effected have not reduced the vigilance of the inspectors.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that in every other Department dealing with human life, including the Home Office, they are increasing the number of inspectors in order to safeguard human life?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I do not think the efficiency of the inspection is necessarily dependent on the number of people engaged.

Mr. HAYES: Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether his reply is based upon a reduction in the number of complaints received?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: My reply is based on the general experience of the Department in carrying out the work.

Oral Answers to Questions — AGRICULTURE.

LAMMAS RIGHTS (THAMES DITTON).

Sir PHILIP RICHARDSON: 40.
asked the Minister of Agriculture whether, in view of the fact that building operations have commenced on Basing Field, Thames Ditton, he will institute an inquiry to ascertain whether any persons are entitled to Lammas rights over such field with the object of preserving it as an open space?

Major ELLIOT: I have been asked to reply. Whether any persons are entitled to Lammas rights over the land to which my hon. Friend refers could only be settled by a Court of Law, and the Minister has no power to decide the point. In the circumstances my right hon. Friend is not prepared to institute an inquiry such as my hon. Friend suggests.

CULTIVATED LAND.

Mr. MONTAGUE: 41.
asked the Minister of Agriculture what is the acreage of land in Great Britain farmed in all branches of agriculture; and how much of such acreage is owned by the Crown and other public authorities, national and local?

Major ELLIOT: The total area of agricultural land in Great Britain in 1926 was 45,142,888 acres, of which 30,369,281 acres were under crops and grass and 14,773,607 acres were rough grazings. My right hon. Friend will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT before the Summer Adjournment a statement giving such information as is obtainable with regard to the area of agricultural land owned by the Crown and other public authorities.

CREDITS (SCOTLAND).

Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: 48.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is preparing an agricultural credit scheme for Scotland?

Major ELLIOT: The matter is under consideration; but my right hon. Friend is not in a position at present to make any statement upon it.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Does that mean that there is to be no agricultural credit scheme for Scotland? Does it mean that while there is to be an agricultural credit scheme for England and Wales, there is to be none for Scotland?

Major ELLIOT: It means what it says, that the matter is under consideration.

UNEMPLOYMENT (AGRICULTURAL WORKERS).

Mr. STEPHEN: 42.
asked the Minister of Agriculture if he intends to introduce legislation to make provision for the assistance of unemployed agricultural workers?

Major ELLIOT: This question was fully considered last year on the Reports presented by the Inter-Departmental Committee appointed to inquire into the question of the application of compulsory unemployment insurance to agricultural workers, and the Government decided that no case had been made out for applying unemployment insurance to agriculture.
The Unemployment Insurance Committee, under the chairmanship of Lord Blanesburgh, also considered the matter, and recommended that no change should be made.

Mr. STEPHEN: Are we to understand from that answer that this Government are going to do nothing to assist the agricultural workers and are only going to assist the property owners?

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member should understand that it was recommended by an eminent member of his own party that no change should be made, and we intend to adhere to that recommendation.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman look at the question? The question is not whether unemployment insurance should apply to agricultural workers, but whether the Government intend to give any kind of assistance to unemployed agricultural workers. Will he kindly try to answer that question?

Major ELLIOT: It is impossible to go into the details of all the schemes which the Government are introducing for the assistance of agricultural workers.

Mr. SPEAKER: We cannot have a Debate now.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL AIR FORCE.

LONG DISTANCE FLIGHTS (INDIA).

Sir R. THOMAS: 43.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he can state an approximate date in the autumn when it is intended to renew the attempt to make a non-stop flight to India?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Philip Sassoon): A further attempt may be made at any time when my advisers are satisfied with the results of certain tests which have yet to be carried out and when meteorological conditions are favourable. I regret I am unable to give an approximate date.

PROMOTION.

Mr. R. MORRISON: 44.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that during the past 12 months an officer, whilst employed as honorary mess secretary at the Record Office,
Ruislip, was placed under arrest for having falsified his personal mess account; that he subsequently made a written confession and was posted to another unit; and why this officer has now been promoted to flight-lieutenant and for what reason this preference has been given?

Sir P. SASSOON: It would not be in accordance with established practice to give the reasons which have led the Air Council, with all the records and facts before them, to select or reject individual officers for promotion, and I could not agree to do so.

GENEVA CONFERENCE.

Mr. HARRIS: 43.
asked the Prime Minister whether he will be able to make a statement before the House rises on the result of the Geneva Conference; and whether it is anticipated that any savings realised will take effect in the present financial year?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Churchill): I think it is doubtful whether any announcement of the result of the Conference can be made before the House adjourns.

Mr. HARRIS: Will there be any opportunity to discuss what is going on at Geneva?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Whether it would be desirable to discuss it in the absence of some result or some Government statement is one question, but, of course, the Adjournment Motion gives considerable liberty to hon. Members.

FRANCHISE (WOMEN).

Miss WILKINSON: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the uneasiness which is being felt by many women at his recent statement that he does not propose to introduce a Measure to equalise the franchise this autumn; and whether, in order to ensure that the younger women shall vote at the next General Election, he will be prepared to reconsider his decision?

Mr. CHURCHILL: It will be possible to make provision in the Franchise Bill for any arrangements which may be
necessary in connection with the preparation of the Register to enable new voters to vote at a General Election in 1929.

Miss WILKINSON: Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that the Government intend that women under 30 years of age shall vote at the next election?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Statements on this subject have been made by the Prime Minister, and I have nothing to add to the declarations of the Government.

Mr. J. H. THOMAS: Does the optimism of the Government carry them, as far as office is concerned, until the year 1929?

Mr. CHURCHILL: Constitutionally, we are bound to indulge in that measure of optimism.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Is it the intention of the Government to introduce legislation in the Session of 1928?

Mr. CHURCHILL: My answer deals fully with the question on the Paper.

Sir JOSEPH NALL: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the volume of agitation mentioned in the question is not substantiated by any evidence or fact?

INSURANCE AND COMPENSATION SCHEMES (CO-ORDINATION).

Mr. C. EDWARDS: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether, in the interest of the payees and with a view to providing a pension scheme for persons of 60 years of age, he will consider the appointment of a Commission to consider the desirability of co-ordinating all friendly society business, health and unemployment insurance, compensation schemes, and all agencies dealing with relief during incapacity from work?

Mr. CHURCHILL: No, Sir; His Majesty's Government do not see their way to adopt the suggestion in the question.

Mr. EDWARDS: What is the reason for that reply? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think there are great possibilities in some such scheme?

Mr. CHURCHILL: All these questions have many attractions, but they are subject to the limitations of time and money.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

LAND RECLAMATION.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: 49.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what schemes of reclamation have been carried out in Scotland since 1912; what is the total area thus reclaimed; and whether he has formed any estimate of the amount of waste land capable of being reclaimed for productive use in Scotland?

Major ELLIOT: The information which my right hon. Friend has been able to obtain shows that the following reclamation work has been carried out:—

(1) The Board of Agriculture has been experimenting on moss land at Midlocharwoods, Dumfriesshire, with the object of testing methods of converting moss into land suitable for agricultural purposes.
(2) The Forth Conservancy Board are proceeding with the reclamation of portions of foreshore mudflats at Kinneil on the Firth of Forth.
(3) Land has been reclaimed by the Edinburgh and Glasgow Distress Committees and the Glasgow District Board of Control.

The area covered by these schemes is about 760 acres. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative. Certain surveys have been undertaken by or at the instance of the Board of Agriculture and with the assistance of the Development Commission, but as it appears that, generally speaking, schemes of land reclamation under present conditions are not economic, the cost of a comprehensive survey must be regarded as unjustifiable in present circumstances.

Mr. THURTLE: Can the hon. and gallant Member say to what extent the value of the land of Scottish landlords has been enhanced by this expenditure of public money?

Major ELLIOT: The schemes are not economic at all. There is a loss on them.

Mr. THURTLE: In spite of the fact that there is a loss, is it not the fact that the landlords of Scotland have benefited considerably from them?

Major ELLIOT: I cannot conceive that the landlords of Scotland can have benefited considerably by schemes which only cover 760 acres.

Mr. SHEPHERD: Will the information gained by these experiments be published?

Major ELLIOT: Yes.

PRISONS.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 52.
asked the Secretary for State for Scotland the average cost of maintaining a prisoner in Duke Street, Barlinnie, and Peterhead Prisons, respectively?

Major ELLIOT: For the year ended the 31st December, 1926, the average annual cost of maintaining a prisoner in the prisons referred to was:—





£
s.
d.


Duke Street
…
…
81
5
0


Barlinnie
…
…
47
5
4


Peterhead
…
…
101
3
4

Mr. MONTAGUE: Will the Secretary of State consider sending a Commission from West Ham to these prisons with a view of securing economy?

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

EMPIRE MARKETING BOARD.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: 54.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs what advice was tendered by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland to the Empire Marketing Board as to what particular classes of home-grown produce should be supported by advertisement and the seasons at which that advertisement should be forthcoming; and how far that advice has been acted upon?

The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. Amery): The officers of the Empire Marketing Board and of the Scottish Board of Agriculture have been in touch, and every endeavour has been made to meet Scottish needs, so far as the nature of the Board's advertising campaign permitted. I should add that it is the Board's policy to create a general background of publicity against which particular interests can throw into relief the merits of any produce with which they are concerned, rather than to undertake advertising campaigns on behalf of particular commodities.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: 55.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs if he is aware that, at the advertising exhibition of the Empire Marketing
Board, foreign goods, including Dutch gin and Swedish ginger, are displayed in prominent positions; and if any of the British taxpayers' money is expended in these processes?

Mr. AMERY: The hon. Member presumably refers to the section of the Empire Marketing Board's exhibit at the Advertising Exhibition which is devoted to a demonstration, for the instruction of home and oversea Empire producers and distributors, of the importance of effective packing and presentation of goods. This display deliberately includes, for the purpose of illustration and comparison, examples of foreign bottles and containers. This is explained on notices affixed to the various stands.

Mr. BROWN: Are we to understand that there are no British articles of a similar nature which can be demonstrated?

Mr. THOMAS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Empire Marketing Board has offered no objection to the exhibition of a mug with a portrait of a very distinguished statesman?

Mr. AMERY: I am not at all sure that that mug is an exhibit of the Empire Marketing Board. The exhibition is not one of Empire goods. It is an educative exhibition to show Empire producers how improvements in methods of presentation can increase sales. A fine example of that has been the improvements by foreign manufacturer's in their sales of goods. The Empire Marketing Board very much appreciate the vigilance of the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) in endeavouring to exclude foreign articles.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if we are to understand that the Government will now rely upon developing efficiency instead of tariffs for the sale of Empire products?

Mr. AMERY: We rely upon every method that will increase their sale.

CHINA.

Mr. SCURR: 59.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give any estimate of the loss to British trade and shipping owing to the present state of affairs in China?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: It is not possible to give any reliable estimate.

STEPHEN'S HALL (PAINTINGS).

Sir CHARLES OMAN: 63.
asked the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether his attention has been called to the fact that the newly executed fresco of King John sealing Magna Carta, in St. Stephen's Hall, continues to incur criticism among Members both for artistic and for historical reasons; and whether measures can be taken to replace it by a more satisfactory picture?

Captain HACKING (for the FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS): The question raised by my hon. Friend is not an easy one to deal with by way of question and answer, but the First Commissioner is quite prepared at the convenience of my hon. Friend to discuss the matter with him.

Sir C. OMAN: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the subject which the artist has chosen to illustrate, namely, the blowing down of the Royal Standard, and the grave injury thereby caused to the head of the Papal Legate, did not occur?

Mr. THURTLE: In considering this matter, will the hon. and gallant Member bear in mind that the great majority of hon. Members are very well satisfied with the new pictures in St. Stephen's Hall?

Mr. E. BROWN: Is the hon. and gallant Member not aware that the Royal Standard flagpole is not blown down, as in the picture the pole has been cut, according to the artist?

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: Would it not be more in accordance with the sentiment of the nation if this picture were removed and the picture of the burial of the Unknown Warrior were replaced?

Captain HACKING: We had a long discussion on history a few days ago, and I am afraid I cannot be expected at short notice to answer any further historical questions regarding any of the pictures placed in St. Stephen's Hall. In regard to the supplementary question put by the hon. Member for Shoreditch (Mr. Thurtle), I think there is a great measure of satisfaction, expressed universally throughout the House, with these pictures. As to the replacement of
the Unknown Warrior, there has been a long discussion between my right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works and the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and I thought that some measure of satisfaction had been achieved.

Mr. LAMB: Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman take steps to see what measure of satisfaction there is in the House by inquiring of other Members?

Mr. HARRIS: Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that some hon. Members admire this picture immensely as a great work of art, and that the same criticism was made about William Blake's pictures about 100 years ago?

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: May I ask who is the ultimate authority in deciding what pictures should be hung, and where?

Captain HACKING: The ultimate authority, I understand, is the Lord Great Chamberlain, who is responsible for the pictures hung in the Palace of Westminster.

Mr. BROWN: Arising out of the answer about the Unknown Warrior, does the satisfaction to which the hon. and gallant Member referred mean that the picture is now to be put in Westminster Hall, where all the public can see it?

Captain HACKING: No, Sir. I understand that the artist considers that if this picture were placed in Westminster Hall the damp atmosphere would damage it, and he himself desires that it should remain temporarily where it is, in the Royal Robing Room.

Mr. LEE: May we take it that it is only temporarily in the Royal Robing Room?

Captain HACKING: Yes, only temporarily.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: Is the hon. and gallant Member aware that that is not at all in accordance with what we agreed to?

Oral Answers to Questions — INDIA.

STATE RAILWAYS (FINANCES).

Mr. SHEPHERD: 65.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the book value of the assets of the Indian State railways; and the debt at present out standing in respect of these railways?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Earl Winterton): The total capital at charge of Indian State Railways, including those worked by companies, on the 31st March, 1926, the latest date up to which actual figures are available, was in round figures Rs.614½ crores. The Government debt outstanding in respect of these railways at the same date, which is taken as including Rs.14 crores provided from Revenue, was Rs.567½ crores, and the capital outlay from funds contributed by companies and Indian States was Rs.47 crores.

COTTON MANUFACTURES (DUTIES).

Mr. SHEPHERD: 69.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the decision of the Government of India on the findings of the Indian Tariff Board (cotton textile industry inquiry) gives an advantage to Japan of 10 per cent. over Lancashire and other imported cloth; and whether these decisions have the approval of His Majesty's Government?

Earl WINTERTON: My Noble Friend is aware that the Government of India found that the advantage to Japan resulting from labour conditions in that country, which will continue until July, 1929, when the new Japanese Factory Law comes into full operation, amounts to 10 per cent. The comparison was between conditions in Japan and India, but a comparison between conditions in Japan and the United Kingdom would, no doubt, give a similar result. The decision of the Government of India is to leave the duties on cotton manufactures

—
1921.
1922.
1923.
1924.
1925.
1926.
1927.
Total.


Number of Indians admitted to Indian Civil Service by examination in India.
(No exam.).
9
9
5
5
3
9
40


Number of Indians admitted to Indian Civil Service by examination in England.
13
10
4
8
15
11
—
61


Number of Europeans admitted to Indian Civil Service by examination in England.
3
6
7
3
21
29
—
69

BACK BAY RECLAMATION SCHEME, BOMBAY.

Mr. SCURR: 72.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the military

as they are. My Noble Friend does not doubt that this decision is a wise one.

RAILWAY WORKS (JAMSHEDPUR FACTORY).

Mr. KELLY: 70.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Government of India have purchased a factory at Jamshedpur for the manufacture of under-frames in connection with the railway works; and whether he can state the annual saving on purchases in the United Kingdom and in Calcutta as a result, and the annual estimated saving to the Government of India?

Earl WINTERTON: The works at Jamshedpur recently taken over by the Secretary of State are intended to be used for the manufacture of carriage under-frames, but I am unable to give any estimate of the financial results.

CIVIL SERVICE (ENTRANTS).

Mr. SCURR: 71.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the number of Indians who have been admitted to the Indian Civil Service during each of the last five years by examination in India, and the number admitted by examination in this country; and the number of Europeans admitted in each of the last five years?

Earl WINTERTON: As the answer involves a number of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The totals are Indians admitted by examination in India, 40, and by examination in England, 61. Europeans admitted by examination in England, 69.

Following is the answer:

department of the Government of India have yet taken over the land prepared for them by the Bombay Government
in the Back Bay reclamation scheme; whether he can give particulars as to the price of that land; and whether the price has yet been paid?

Earl WINTERTON: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The price to be paid is 256 lakhs. So far as my Noble Friend is aware, no part of the price has yet been paid.

ROSYTH DOCKYARD (RESERVE DESTROYERS).

Mr. T. KENNEDY: 74.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the various reserve destroyers now stationed in southern dockyards are to be accommodated in Rosyth Dockyard; and, if so, when the change is likely to take place?

Sir P. SASSOON (for Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM): A scheme is being worked out for laying up a considerable number of reserve destroyers in the basin at Rosyth under such conditions of maintenance that they can be preserved from deterioration by a comparatively small staff of naval personnel, accommodated in a depot ship. The scheme will be put into operation gradually, and it is hoped that it will be completed during the course of next year. The object is to effect considerable economy in maintenance of destroyers in reserve and to relieve berthing congestion in southern yards.

Mr. KELLY: Are we to understand from that reply that this dockyard is to be manned by naval ratings?

Sir P. SASSOON: I am afraid that I cannot answer that question. This does not mean that the place will be reopened as a dockyard. The naval personnel will be accommodated on a depot ship and will not be accommodated on land.

Mr. KELLY: Does that mean that the civilian employés will not be engaged in keeping these ships in repair?

Sir P. SASSOON: I must ask for notice of that question.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

AUTUMN SESSION.

Mr. CLYNES: May I now ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to announce
the business for next week, and may I also ask him whether he can announce the date on which the House will be asked to reassemble after the Recess?

Mr. CHURCHILL: After this week the business outstanding which it is necessary to conclude before the Summer Recess is as follows:

Three Allotted Supply Days.
All stages of the
Consolidated Fund (Appropriation) Bill;
Isle of Man (Customs) Bill;
Workmen's Compensation (Transfer of Funds) Bill (Lords);
Lords Amendments to the Trade Disputes Bill,

and to any other Bills which have been passed by this House;
And, finally, the Motion for the Summer Adjournment.
The business for next week will be:

On Monday, 25th July, 18th Allotted Supply Day; Board of Trade Vote.
On Tuesday, 26th July, 19th Allotted Supply Day; Board of Education Vote.
At Ten O'clock, the outstanding Votes in Committee will be put from the Chair.
On Wednesday, 27th July, 20th Allotted Supply Day; Ministry of Labour Vote.
At Ten O'clock, the outstanding Votes on Report will be put from the Chair.

In the event of the Trade Disputes Bill not being substantially amended in another place, it is hoped that it will be possible on Thursday, 28th July, to put down as the first Order the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill, and afterwards, at about dinner-time, to enter upon the consideration of the Lords Amendments to the Trade Disputes Bill. Then, on Friday, 29th July, it would be possible to take the remaining stages of the Appropriation Bill and the Motion for the Summer Adjournment.
The merit of this proposal is that should more time be required for the Lords Amendments to the Trade Disputes Bill, we still have Saturday, 30th July, to fall back upon in order to avoid sitting on August Bank Holiday.
During the early part of the week, at the conclusion of other business, it will be necessary to consider the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill, the Workmen's Compensation
(Transfer of Funds) Bill (Lords), and the Lords Amendments to any Bills other than the Trade Disputes Bill.
The Bills now before Parliament which will have to be Considered in the Autumn are:

All stages of the
Aliens Restriction Bill (Lords).
Betting Overseas (Prohibition) Bill.
Colonial Probates (Prohibited States and Mandated Territories) Bill (Lords).
Companies Bill (Lords).
Judicial Committee Bill (Lords).
Police Districts (Scotland) Bill (Lords).
Reorganisation of Offices Bill (Scotland).
Welsh Church (Burial Grounds) Bill (Lords).

and the following Bills to come from another place:

Indian Church Bill (Lords).
Medical and Dentists Act Amendment Bill (Lords).
Rabbits and Rooks Bill (Lords).
Statute Law Revision Bill (Lords).

The remaining stages of the

Audit (Local Authorities) Bill;
Cinematograph Films Bill;
Destructive Insects and Pests Bill;
Landlord and Tenant (No. 2) Bill;
Ouse Drainage Bill;
Sheriff Courts and Legal Officers (Scotland) Bill.

It is not possible to give an exhaustive list of the new Bills which may be required to be passed into law in the Autumn, but it will be necessary to pass the

Expiring Laws Bill and the

Unemployment Insurance Bill.

It is proposed that the House should reassemble on Tuesday, 8th November.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No. 15, Business other than Business of Supply may be taken before Eleven of the Clock, and that the Proceedings on the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill be exempted at this day's Sitting from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[Mr. Churchill.]

Mr. BUCHANAN: On a point of Order. May I ask, in the first place, whether this should not be taken as two separate Motions, and, secondly, whether the part relating to the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill is debateable?

Mr. SPEAKER: If hon. Members insist, the Motion may be put in two separate parts, but neither part is debateable.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is it intended to put it in two separate parts?

Mr. SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member ask that it should be put in that way?

Mr. BUCHANAN: Yes.

Mr. SPEAKER: I would only point out to the hon. Member that, in asking to have separate Motions put, he is depriving his own colleagues of opportunity of speaking on the other matters which are to come before the House.

Mr. BUCHANAN: It is my wish that it should be put as two separate Motions.

Question put,
That this day, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No. 15, Business other than Business of Supply, may be taken before Eleven of the Clock.

The House divided: Ayes, 207; Noes, 89.

Division No. 278.]
AYES.
[3.51 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Bethel, A.
Caine, Gordon Hall


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Betterton, Henry B.
Carver, Major W. H.


Albery, Irving James
Blundell, F. N
Cautley, Sir Henry S.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Boothby, R. J. G.
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Braithwalte, Major A. N.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Brass Captain W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Chapman, Sir S.


Atholl, Duchess of
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.


Balniel, Lord
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Chilcott, Sir Warden


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Christie. J. A.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Buchan, John
Churchman, Sir Arthur C.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Buckingham, Sir H.
Clary, Reginald George


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Bullock, Captain M.
Clayton, G. C.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Burman, J. B.
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Raine, Sir Walter


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Ramsden, E.


Cooper, A. Duff
Huntingfield, Lord
Remnant, Sir James


Cope, Major William
Hurd, Percy A.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Couper, J. B.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Illffe, Sir Edward M.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs, Stretford)


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Ropner, Major L.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rye, F. G.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William
Salmon, Major I.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Kidd J. (Linlithgow)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Dawson, Sir Philip
Lamb, J. Q.
Sandon, Lord


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Scott, Rt. Hon. Sir Leslie


Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Skelton, A. N.


England, Colonel A.
Long, Major Eric
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Smithers, Waldron


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lumley, L. R
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
MacIntyre, Ian
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
McLean, Major A.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Fermoy, Lord
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Macquisten, F. A.
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Forrest, W.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Malone, Major P. B.
Styles, Captain H. W.


Fraser, Captain Ian
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Gates, Percy
Margesson, Captain D.
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Goff, Sir Park
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Tinne, J. A.


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. H. (Ayr)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Grant, Sir J. A.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Waddington, R.


Grotrian, H. Brent
Murchison, Sir Kenneth
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Nelson, Sir Frank
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hammersley, S. S.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Hanbury, C.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Harrison, G. J. C.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Nuttall, Ellis
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Hawke, John Anthony
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Penny, Frederick George
Wise, Sir Fredric


Hilton, Cecil
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Withers, John James


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Perkins, Colonel E. K.
Wood, E.(Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Holt, Captain H. P.
Perring, Sir William George
Wood, Sir S. Hill-(High Peak)


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wragg, Herbert


Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Pilcher, G.



Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
TELLERS FOR THE AYES—


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Major Sir George Hennessy and




Captain Bowyer.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Grundy, T. W.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Ammon, Charles George
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Potts, John S.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hardie, George D.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Baker, Walter
Harris, Percy A.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Rose, Frank H.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Scurr, John


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Buchanan, G.
Kelly, W. T.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Clowes, S.
Kennedy, T.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Compton, Joseph
Kirkwood, D.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Connolly, M.
Lansbury, George
Snell, Harry


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lawrence, Susan
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Lumn, William
Stamford, T. W.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Stephen, Campbell


Day, Colonel Harry
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Sutton, J. E.


Dennison, R.
Maxton, James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duncan, C.
Montague, Frederick
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Dunnico, H.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Gardner, J. P.
Mosley, Oswald
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Gillett, George M.
Murnin, H.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Palin, John Henry
Thurtle, Ernest


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Paling, W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)




Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Whittley, W.



Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Wilkinson, Ellen C.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES,—


Wellock, Wilfred
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.


Westwood, J.
Windsor, Walter

Question put,
That the Proceedings on the Isle of Man (Customs) Bill be exempted at this

day's Sitting from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."

The House divided: Ayes, 213; Noes, 57.

Division No. 279.]
AYES.
[4.0 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Ainsworth, Major Charles
England, Colonel A.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Albery, Irving James
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Moore, Lieut.-Col. T. C. R. (Ayr)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Murchison, Sir Kenneth


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Nall, Colonel Sir Joseph


Ashley, Lt.-col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Fermoy, Lord
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Atholl, Duchess of
Forrest, W.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Nuttall, Ellis


Balniel, Lord
Fraser, Captain Ian
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Barclay-Harvey C. M.
Gates, Percy
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Penny, Frederick George


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Goff, Sir Park
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Perring, Sir William George


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Grant, Sir J. A.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Pilcher, G.


Bethel, A.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Blundell, F. N.
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Price, Major C. W. M.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hammersley, S. S.
Ralne, Sir Walter


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hanbury, C.
Ramsden, E.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)
Remnant, Sir James


Brass, Captain W.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hawke, John Anthony
Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs, Stretford)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Ropner, Major L.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Rye, F. G.


Buchan, John
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Salmon, Major I.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hilton, Cecil
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Bullock, Captain M.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Burman, J. B.
Holt, Captain H. P.
Sandon, Lord


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Scott, Rt. Hon. Sir Leslie


Calne, Gordon Hall
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Carver, Major W. H.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Skelton, A. N.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Smith, R. W (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Smithers, Waldron


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Huntingfield, Lord
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hurd, Percy A.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Chapman, Sir S
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Illffe, Sir Edward M.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Christie, J. A.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Styles, Captain H. W.


Clarry, Reginald George
Joynson-Hicks, Rt. Hon. Sir William
Tasker, R. Inigo.


Clayton, G. C.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Lamb, J. Q.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Cooper, A. Duff
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Tinne, J. A.


Couper, J. B.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Long, Major Eric
Waddington, R.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Lumley, L. R.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
McLean, Major A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Macmillan, Captain H.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Macquisten, F. A.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Malone, Major P. B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Wise, Sir Fredric
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)
Major Cope and Captain Margesson.


Withers, John James
Wragg, Herbert



NOES.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Shepherd, Arthur Lawis


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Baker, Walter
Kelly, W. T.
Snell, Harry


Batey, Joseph
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Lansbury, George
Sullivan, J.


Clowes, S.
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J. E.


Compton, Joseph
Lee, F.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Connolly, M.
Lunn, William
Thurtle, Ernest


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
MacLaren, Andrew
Tinker, John Joseph


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Maxton, James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Dennison, R.
Murnin, H.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Duncan, C.
Paling, W.
Wellock, Wilfred


Dunnico, H.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Westwood, J.


Gardner, J. P.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.
Windsor, Walter


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-spring)



Grundy, T. W.
Rose, Frank H.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Scurr, John
Mr. Stephen and Mr. Buchanan.

ROAD TRANSPORT LIGHTING BILL.

Reported, with Amendments, from Standing Committee A.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed.

Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration upon Wednesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 181.]

BILLS REPORTED.

Hospital of St. Mary the Virgin (Newcastle-upon-Tyne) Bill [Lords],—reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Salford Corporation Bill [Lords],

Reported, with Amendments, from the Local Legislation Committee (Section B); Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

That they have agreed to,

Colchester Corporation Bill,
Torquay Corporation Bill,
West Bromwich Corporation Bill,
Chepping Wycombe Corporation Bill, with Amendments.

Amendment to—

Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

Amendments to—

Wessex Electricity Bill [Lords],
Fleetwood Urban District Council Bill [Lords],
Isle of Wight Water Bill [Lords], without Amendment.

That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to make permanent section one of The Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act, 1919." [Aliens Restriction Bill [Lords.]

CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS BILL.

Reported, with Amendments, from the Standing Committee C.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 92.]

Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed. [No. 92.]

Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration upon Wednesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 182.]

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

STANDING COMMITTEE A.

Mr. William Nicholson reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from Standing Committee A: Lord
Fermoy, Sir Clement Kinloch-Cooke, Mr. Macquisten, Major-General Sir Newton Moore, Major Price, Mr. Shepperson, and Colonel' Woodcock; and had appointed in substitution: Viscountess Astor, Captain Cazalet, Captain Gunston, Mr. Looker, Major-General Sir Richard Luce, Mr. Geoffrey Peto, and Viscount Sandon.

Mr. William Nicholson further reported from the Committee; That they had discharged the following member from Standing Committee A (added in respect of the Nursing Houses (Registration) Bill): Sir Frederic Wise; and had appointed in substitution: Sir Kingsley Wood.

Report to lie upon the Table.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

[17th ALLOTTED DAY.]

Considered in Committee.

[Captain FITZROY in the Chair.]

CIVIL ESTIMATES, 1927.

CLASS V.

SCOTTISH BOARD OF HEALTH.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That, a sum, not exceeding £2,387,155, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Scottish Board of Health, including Grants and other Expenses in connection with Housing, Grants to Local Authorities, etc., in connection with Public Health Services, Grant-in-Aid of the Highlands and Islands Medical Service, Grants-in-Aid in respect of Benefits and Expenses of Administration under the National Health Insurance Acts, certain Expenses in connection with the Widows', Orphans', and Old Age Contributory Pensions Act, 1925, and certain Special Services."—[Note: £920,000 has been, voted on account.]

Mr. WILLIAM ADAMSON: There is an important matter in connection with the health, the housing and the happiness of a large section of the people which I want to take the opportunity of raising upon the present Vote. There are thousands of our Scottish miners who are housed in dwellings belonging to the various colliery companies thoughout the Scottish coalfields who, because of certain circumstances which transpired in the course of last year, have been placed in a very great difficulty, and I should like, if we could, to have the assistance of the Secretary of State for Scotland with a view of getting, if possible, this problem solved with a minimum of sacrifice to that section of our people. In the course of last year, due to the stoppage in the mining industry, thousands of miners occupying houses belonging to the various colliery companies fell into arrears with the payment of their rent and rates. May I explain that the system of paying rent and rates, as far as that particular section of our people is concerned, is by a weekly payment
made in the name of rent and rates? That weekly payment is deducted, by arrangement between the colliery owners and ourselves, from the wages of the men who occupy those houses.
The stoppage to which I have referred lasted, as the Committee well knows, about seven months, and these weekly payments of rent and rates were not met. Consequently, that section of our people got into considerable debt with the colliery owners. When the stoppage ended, the representatives of the men had a meeting with the colliery owners and discussed this problem with them. It was suggested, to begin with, by the representatives of the men, that the colliery owners should agree, now that the stoppage was ended, and peace restored, to forgo their claim for payment of these arrears of rent and rates. This the colliery owners refused to do, but they were prepared to enter into an agreement with the representatives of the men to have the payment of the arrears of rent and rates spread over a considerable period of time, and, consequently, they suggested that the method by which these arrears could be paid off should be by deducting from the wages of the men rent and a half weekly. Eventually the representatives of the men agreed to that arrangement. Unfortunately, since the stoppage, many of the miners occupying houses belonging to the colliery companies have been unable to find employment. Owing to various causes, the colliery owners have not been able to employ as large a number of men as they formerly did.
I shall be told, during the course of the brief discussion that may arise on the particular point I am putting, that the men were largely to blame because of the stoppage of last year. That is a point with which I have already dealt in this House. I have pointed out to my fellow-members in a, former Debate that, even if there had been no stoppage in the coalfields last year, this was a difficulty we should have been meeting in due course. The chief reason the mine-owners, under present conditions, are unable to employ as many men as formerly is because of the competition which the mining industry is facing to-day. That is an aspect of the question which I cannot debate in detail.
The mining industry to-day is facing competition of a kind against which it has not had to contend before in its long history. There is the competition from oil, a wider application of electricity which in many instances is generated without the use of a single ounce of coal, and the development of coal fields in other parts of the world. The result is that these men are still on unemployment benefit and are not in a position to meet their obligations to the colliery owners as far as rent and rates are concerned. They are not able to implement the bargain made by their representatives for the payment of arrears to the extent of rent and a half being deducted weekly from their earnings. Consequently, more than a year's arrears of rent and rates are in many cases standing against these men, particularly the men who have been unfortunate enough up to the present time not to have found employment. The colliery owners are now taking legal action to recover arrears of rent and rates, more particularly in coal fields in Ayrshire, Lanarkshire, the Lothians, Stirlingshire, Fifeshire, Clackmannon and Kinross. In a number of instances they have taken the men to court and have secured decrees for the arrears of rent, and in some instances decrees for the ejectment of the men from their homes.
In some of the districts we have met the representatives of the colliery owners and have endeavoured by negotiations to persuade them to stay their hand in regard to taking legal proceedings against that unfortunate section of our men. In certain instances, in my own district for one, some of the colliery owners have met us in the direction of staying their hand, but we recognise that, at best, any beneficial effect of negotiations of that kind can only be temporary, because if the present position in the coal trade is to prevail for any length of time, and there are numbers of men who take the view, rightly or wrongly, that it is likely to prevail for a considerable time to come, that is a burden which we cannot expect the coal trade will continue to carry for an indefinite period. Consequently the representatives of the mining districts in this House and the representatives of the Scottish Miners' National Union have discussed the problem with the Secretary of State for Scotland and some of his colleagues in the
Government with a view to getting whatever assistance we can from the right hon. Gentleman and the Government to overcome the difficulty.
It is a great problem. It is a problem that deserves the most careful consideration that it is possible for us to give to it. If large numbers of our people are to be threatened with eviction, or if the colliery owner is to carry proceedings a stage further than he has already done and to eject large numbers of our men, it will give rise to a very considerable amount of feeling not only among the mining population but other sections of people. Therefore, I thought it right to take this opportunity of bringing the matter again before the notice of the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Government. We have explained the difficulty to the right hon. Gentleman, and he agreed to take the matter into consideration. If he has finished consideration of the problem we should be glad to hear any information which he can give to-day, or we should like to know whether he requires more time for consideration of the problem. I frankly admit that it is a big problem and one that requires very serious consideration by the right hon. Gentleman and everyone intimately connected with the mining industry. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us to-day what he can do to help us to overcome this great difficulty?

Mr. KIDD: I earnestly hope that the Secretary of State for Scotland will be able to discover some means by which we can meet this difficulty, which was rightly and fairly stated by the right hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Adamson). I have some anxiety about the reply of the right hon. Gentleman, because I fear that he will be hampered by want of power. We are asking him to intervene in a matter which is, strictly, a personal contract between the owner of the house and the tenant who occupies it; but I would ask him to remember that the circumstances are altogether very exceptional. I have had ease after case brought to my notice where there must be a positive feeling of torture in many a home at the end of every week. I am not going to discuss anything about the stoppage, except to say that this is one of the bitterest aspects of the bitter aftermath of the
stoppage. In my own mining districts it is quite common to find highly respected miners, men who have done good service, men whose savings were consumed by the stoppage, now faced with broken time and a broken wage, occupying a company's house, and in addition to the current rent there is deducted from the broken wage the whole or part of a week's back rent.
I have tried to devise means of modifying the difficulty for these people, and up to the present time, pending what the Secretary of State for Scotland may say, the only possible assistance I could recommend to these people was that they ought to pay the current rent and that with regard to the past rent they should, failing agreement, leave it to the arbitrament of the county sheriff to say in what instalments that back rent should be required. I am certain that the county Judge in every mining county has no notion to be ultra-sentimental or unduly generous, but recognising the exceptional circumstances there is hardly one county Judge in a mining county who would not be generous to the last point in fixing the instalments that ought to be paid for the back rent. But there remains this awkward difficulty even for the county sheriff, that under the Rents Act while there is security for the sitting tenant that security is entirely lost if the rent is not paid. I take it, subject to what the Lord Advocate says, that failure to pay the rent would create a condition which would justify, under the strict letter of the law, the eviction of the tenant.
I would ask the Secretary of State to apply his mind to this point. If the step which I suggest could be taken, of leaving the settlement of back rent to the arbitrament, and I hope the merciful and generous arbitrament of the sheriff of the county, in that case could there not be some modification of the Rents Act, so that so long as the current rent was paid and a very moderate instalment of back rent paid there would be no jeopardising of the security of the sitting tenant? I realise that not only the miner but the mineowner is suffering a good deal at the present time. Whoever is to be blamed, I do not think it can be the proprietor of the house. Both the proprietor and the tenant of the house are victims of
the calamity. Speaking from what experience I have had of my county, even if the Secretary of State could do nothing else than make a representation to the owners of the mines who are also the proprietors of miners' houses that some extended indulgence should be allowed with regard to the recovery of the arrears of rent, I can hardly doubt that the mine-owners would lend a very willing ear to that proposal. I take it that the miners' representatives, on the other hand, would clearly distinguish between the position of the man who remains at work in the mines and the position of the man who occupying a mineowner's house goes to another occupation. There are hosts of difficulties. To begin with, the miner may only leave the mine because the mine is not able to afford him anything approaching a living wage. He may most reluctantly leave the mine and go to other work, simply and solely for that reason. That presents a very difficult case. It can hardly be expected that the proprietor of the house, a house let to one of his own workers to begin with, should continue to let that house, to the exclusion, it may be, of some other worker, to the old tenant who has gone to other work and is allowed this privilege of paying by excessively moderate instalments the back rent.
I want to reinforce the views expressed by the right hon. Member for West Fife and the appeal which he made to the Secretary of State. I am conscious of the thorny nature of this subject and am well aware of the very difficult position of the Secretary of State and of the fact that he may entirely lack any power under the law to do what he might wish to do to help the miner. In that case I hope he will find it quite consistent with the dignity of his great office to take the other course and to make representations to the mineowners and the miners' representatives as I suggest.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I do not intend to elaborate the questions raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson) and the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Kidd) with regard to miners' houses. It is an exceedingly important question, and any support which I can give in the manner suggested I shall gladly give. Nor do I wish to discuss the question of urban housing, though nobody who represent
any part of Scotland could fail to be other than alarmed at some of the statements which appeared in the very excellent Report issued by the Scottish Board of Health. I read with feelings of pain that part of it which refers to housing conditions in certain parts of Glasgow. I understand some of my hon. Friends who represent that city intend to raise that point. If it had not been so, I for one, though it is outwith the territory I represent, should have raised it myself. I do not believe any Member of this House has ever read a more pathetic or terrible description of housing conditions than that given in the Report this year by the Board of Health for Scotland. I, along with some of my colleagues, put some questions to my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland upon it, and I do not know what action has been taken, but I am convinced that the Report has aroused great feeling in Scotland, and I should be glad to hear from him, and so would all Scottish Members, that something is being done to remedy conditions which are a disgrace to the 20th Century.
I am going to deal with the rural side of the housing problem. I understand I am entitled to do so, as the Scottish Board of Health have got under their supervision, the various housing grants, even the housing grant for the rural workers under the Act of last year. I was very glad to see my hon. and gallant Friend the Under-Secretary of State took the precaution to go to the capital of the Highlands to discuss that question with the eminently far-seeing local authorities up there, and I was glad to understand from the reports issued that one county that took a real live interest in this subject was the county which I have the honour to represent in this House. It is a good thing that the Under-Secretary of State, who has a first-class knowledge of this type of problem, should go to the various parts of Scotland to help the local authorities to understand what powers they have under this Act. It was a wise and just thing that the rural workers should be included in the Act, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is entitled to credit for including them.
The condition of rural housing in Scotland is a very serious one, and I have always noticed that it is not so much that you want new houses, though that
is a very essential thing, as that you want the old houses to be repaired. The great advantage of this new Act, as I understand it, is that not only are you entitled to get a grant-in-aid for the construction of new houses, but you are entitled to get what you do not get under the main Act, a grant for the repair of old houses which are in a bad state of repair. I would like to ask my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, to say whether the Under-Secretary of State is to pursue his propaganda and explain to the rural workers the advantages they get under this Act, and further to state what applications have already been received and what action has been taken generally. My hon. Friends who represent rural parts of Scotland will appreciate the importance of this, and they will also appreciate the fact that it takes a long time to get the local authorities to realise what benefits will accrue under an Act so recently passed. I think therefore that the Secretary of State for Scotland should take every step in his power to explain to local authorities what powers they have under the Act.
There is one aspect of the Report with which I should like to deal. I refer to that part of it which deals with the special Highlands and Islands Medical Service Fund. As the Committee will recollect, during the passing of the Insurance Act there was a provision made for the special conditions in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, and I think it is right to state that the Scottish Board of Health have been very active in what they have been doing with regard to this particular part of the country. They have done a great deal of good, and the fund generally has been of very great assistance in those remote parts where the conditions are entirely different from those in any other part of the country. I notice that the Report says that the fund which is at present at the disposal of the Board of Health is still at the pre-War figure of £42,000, and that they themselves do not think that they will be able to cope with any new scheme unless and until there is a reconstitution of that fund. They confess, quite openly, on page 180 of their Report, as follows:
In the meantime, until the fund is reconstituted, the assistance granted from it must be restricted to the services already in being, notwithstanding that the time seems ripe for a scheme of development in
the Highlands and Islands and for the introduction of a system of specialised services, for both of which there is great need in this part of the country.
I need not tell the Committee how essential it is to have a first-class local hospital in the various parts of Scotland. At the present time, we have, for example, at Dingwall the Ross Memorial Hospital, and we are busy rebuilding and extending one of the finest institutions in the country, the Infirmary at Inverness. I am speaking subject to correction, but I do not know whether the Board of Health have taken so far an interest in the particular hospitals mentioned; though I believe they have realised the importance of having efficient local hospitals in the various parts of Scotland. They also see, and wisely see, that it is necessary to have specialised services. Nobody knows what a hero the ordinary Highland doctor is. Any man with a knowledge of the conditions in the Highlands and Islands knows the splendid work the Highland doctor performs. In the wildest storm, over bad roads, sometimes over arms of the sea, he goes at all hours of the day and night; very often for a miserable fee, to attend to the poorest people in the land, and I for one shall be glad to see any betterment of the conditions of his service. It is far too much to expect one single individual to be responsible for the welfare and the health of an entire community without some such assistance as can be given to him from a hospital as nearly situated to his work as possible. May I also ask the right hon. Gentleman if his attention has been drawn to the appeal made by the medical officers for consideration of the establishment of a superannuation fund? They regard themselves now as being in the State service, and, judging from the Report which I have just been reading, it is quite clear they have some claim to be so considered. I should like to ask my right hon. Friend whether he is considering their appeal.
There is another important point. It is often very difficult for the local doctor to get a suitable house. I see by my side the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Sir R. Hamilton). I know that is a problem which affects his part of the country very much indeed. As a matter of fact, I think I am justified in saying that this very point was raised by his
predecessor, Mr. Cathcart Wason, and myself, when this was introduced as an Act of Parliament in 1911. The point was that the local doctor should be guaranteed a house or the site for a house in the remote parts where it is often difficult to get them. I am glad to see in any case that the Board of Health are still considering that point. Last year, as far as I can make out, they caused the erection of three houses for doctors in various parts of the country. That is the sort of thing that is well worth doing. There is nothing so important as to give the local doctor, the local schoolmaster, or the local minister some sense of stability in the very remote and rural parts in which they find themselves situated. Perhaps in the course of his reply my right hon. Friend will deal with this point. I do not intend at the present moment to raise any other point, but these are points which are of great importance to the people I represent.

Commander FANSHAWE: I rise for a very few moments to do my utmost to support the point of view put forward by my right hon. Friend the Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson) and the appeal made by him and by the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Kidd). We differ on both sides of the House as to the cause of the stoppage of the coal mining industry last year. I say without any offence at all that I believe the miners were misled last year, and they have been misled one way or another for many years, sometimes by their leaders, sometimes by politicians and by other people. We had a most disastrous stoppage last year, and there is bitterness. If that bitterness is going into the homes of the miners, with their wives and families, we shall have a feeling which we ought to do our utmost to prevent. Prevention is better than cure. If that bitterness goes into a man's home, it will not only affect the man and his wife but, more important still, it will affect the upbringing of his family, its clothing, food, and so on, and the future generations of our fellow citizens. I therefore ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if it will be possible for something to be done to communicate with the people who own the miners' houses, to see that the men do have easy terms for the repayment of their back rent, and that evictions shall not take place. I do not believe that a great deal of harshness is
now being displayed in dealing with this question. If there be harshness, it is only perhaps in a few places, and if so it will be far more easily dealt with. Everyone engaged in the coal mining industry, as well as the whole nation, wants to smooth over the difficulties and bitternesses of last year's stoppage. That is all I have to say, and I support the appeal made by the right hon. Member for West Fife and the hon. and learned Member for Linlithgow.

Mr. W. M. WATSON: I want to join with those right hon. and hon. Members who have raised this question of the rents which are owing to certain colliery companies by miners who were locked out last year and who have failed to find employment up to now. The right hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson) said that we have made private representations to the Secretary of State for Scotland. I hope that the Secretary of State will be in a position to give some indication of the steps which the Government propose to take to get over this difficulty. Certainly, it is time when we should have some indication from the Government as to what they intend to do, because I can foresee, very shortly, a very serious time unless something is done quickly. In a few days, the House of Commons will have risen, and there may not be the same opportunity for ventilating this type of grievance as there has been during the past few months. There is just a chance, also, that the colliery companies may be preparing to put greater pressure on those who owe these rents than they have done up till now. As my right hon. Friend said, strong representations have been made by the National Union of Scottish Mining Workers to get the colliery owners to hold their hands. That has been going on for months, but there is no guarantee that the colliery companies will continue in that frame of mind very much longer.
We may have, before the House meets again, a very serious situation in the coalfields. This is not a matter which applies to a few individual miners, or to men who were miners prior to the lock-out of last year; it involves thousands of men who were employed in the mines before the stoppage and who have failed to find employment since, and are now beginning to face certain difficulties which they have not met up till now. Up till now, they
have been drawing unemployment benefit in cases where they have failed to find employment, but before long they will have to face trouble in that direction. They will be cut off by the Employment Exchanges, and will not be in a position to pay the current rent, let alone the arrears due to the stoppage of last year. That is undoubtedly a very serious situation. I would not care to say what may transpire if we have a dozen, a score or perhaps a hundred families in one particular area evicted at one time. We may find that more than the families which are involved may take action of a kind which may give the local authorities some trouble. It will be most unfortunate if such a situation arises because, in addition to the fact that there will be evictions, there is not sufficient housing accommodation available for those who may be evicted should the colliery companies go to that extreme.
Another situation has been created by the fact that owing to the number of men who have been in receipt of unemployment benefit and parish relief on account of unemployment, additional burdens have had to be borne by other ratepayers, because the local authorities during this year have had appeals made to them by many miners who have failed to find employment to be relieved of their rates. This process of relieving these individuals of their rates means that the other ratepayers have got to shoulder this additional burden. All these things are helping to create a very bad feeling in Scotland, and if, on top of that, we have wholesale evictions, I am afraid we may see a very serious situation indeed. I join with those who have already made an appeal from both sides of the Committee. Those who live in the mining areas know the dangers that lie ahead in those particular districts, especially where large numbers of men have no prospect of finding employment. There is no guarantee that during the course of this year those men will find employment in the mining industry. At the moment, they are occupying houses belonging to the colliery companies. In a few cases, they may have found employment outside, but the great bulk of these men are still going idle and likely to remain so for some considerable time. Until we see a vast improvement in the coal trade we cannot hope to see these men in a position to pay to the colliery companies the back
rent that accumulated last year. In view of all these things, I hope that the right hon. Gentleman can give us some indication to-day that the Government will be able, if nothing more, to get the colliery companies to hold their hands until these men are in a position to pay the back rent due from them.

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): Perhaps I may be permitted to reply at once to this single question, which was put to me originally by the right hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. W. Adamson), and afterwards by other hon. Members on both sides of the Committee. As the right hon. Gentleman indicated, he and others have been in communication with myself and other members of the Government on this problem. It is clear from what has been said to-day and from the language of those who have gone into this question, that it is a problem of no small magnitude. So far as my Office is concerned, I have conferred with those who are interested, both in this House and outside it, and I have called for and received elaborate and detailed reports as to the situation arising in various localities where this problem is clamant. All I can say to the Committee to-day is that the Government are fully alive to the difficulties and importance of this problem. The actual steps which one has been able to take have been, as I say, to confer with those on both sides in the industry, and it is only fair to say—as the right hon. Gentleman has already said—that in the main, and I think generally, the colliery owners and proprietors of colliery house property have acted with great consideration and have not pressed the men unduly. Cases that have been taken for eviction have, of course, to go through the ordinary channels before the Sheriff. One hon. Member asked that the Sheriff should have the deciding power, but that is, in fact, what is happening at the present time.
It is also clear that while, in a measure, some mitigation can be obtained by the arrangements which the right hon. Gentleman has indicated—by an agreement between the men's representatives and the colliery owners as to paying the arrears of rent—while that is true and is being carried into effect, and while we
may hope to see those arrears worked off in the course of time by those men who are in employment in the mines at present, it still leaves the more difficult problem of dealing with those men who have failed to find employment in the mines since the difficulties which have arisen. It is to that aspect of the problem that the Government have been and are addressing themselves at the present time. I can assure the Committee that that is a question for which we are striving, by every means in our power, to find a solution, but those who know most of this matter will agree that it is not a very simple thing to find a solution for some of those difficulties. I cannot say more to the Committee to-day than that we are doing our utmost to probe every avenue. While I can give no definite decision as to what we may be able to do, I would say to those interested in this problem on every side of the Committee, and indeed outside, that if they see any possible avenue of assistance which they can indicate, or method of advice which they can give, we shall be ready to listen to it, to explore it, and to consider it. I can assure the Committee that this is a question which is before the Government at the present time, and is receiving most careful consideration.

Mr. MACPHERSON: Can the right hon. Gentleman say anything about rural housing?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I was dealing with this one particular point. I thought, perhaps, that the Debate might flow on other lines.

5.0 p.m.

Mr. JAMES STEWART: I appreciate, as fully as any hon. Member of the Committee, the difficulties with which the Government have to deal in regard to housing. I appreciate what they have done during this last year to accelerate the number of houses that are being built. Slightly less than 15,000 houses marks a distinct step in advance, but great as is what has been done in that respect, a great deal more must of necessity be done. The Royal Commission pointed out in 1917 that 121,000 houses were required to cope with the lack of housing accommodation for the people and, more than that, 114,000houses extra were needed to meet the 'housing conditions themselves. Since that time, there has only been
built altogether some 19,000 houses. That includes what has been done by State enterprise and what has been done by private enterprise, so that, taking the figure of 1924, namely, 20,000 houses being annually required, it shows that we are now at least 54,000 houses behind our programme to deal with the problem, according to the Royal Commission of 234,000 houses, and according to the local authorities in 1919 of 131,000 houses. Instead of progressing during this period, we have been going backwards all the time. I think that the Government, even as they have accelerated their programme to get 15,000 houses in 1926, could accelerate it still further by taking action which will compel local authorities who are slack to hasten their steps in making the provision that is absolutely necessary. There is one great fault to which the Government ought to give their attention. The Royal Commission declared against the further building of two-apartment houses. To-day these houses are being built and are gradually being extended. The Government are still allowing the two-roomed houses to be built. In Scotland over 50 per cent. of the houses are either of one apartment or of two apartments, and altogether the situation, so far as the standard of housing and increased accommodation is concerned, is not in my opinion being improved in the least degree.
In Glasgow, we have at the moment over 40,000 single-apartment houses occupied, and we have 114,000 room and kitchen houses occupied. In Glasgow, over 80 per cent. of the houses do not exceed three rooms. One and two apartment houses exist to the extent of over 66 per cent. of the total. In that respect progress is not being made to diminish this in the least degree. It cannot be claimed that it is the cost of the houses that is preventing the higher standard, and preventing us getting away from the single-apartment and two-apartment houses. The cost of the two-apartment house is £388, and of the three-apartment house, £362, a difference of £24, which would make a very slight increase in the rate that is necessary to make the difference. I believe I am supported by public opinion generally throughout the country, at least, by that public opinion which is alive to the disgrace in Scotland of the
standard of housing, in urging that action may be taken by the Government to change this state of affairs with regard to two-roomed houses. You have admitted yourselves according, to a reply which was made yesterday to the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), that you are permitting by your State enterprise, the building of 7,200 room and kitchen houses, and I think the time has come when you should call a halt to this.
There are in Glasgow 277,000 people living in over-crowded conditions. If there is a single Englishman present—I do not see one—he would understand that overcrowding in Scotland is three persons per room, while in England it is only two persons per room, and yet in Glasgow alone there are 277,000 people living in excess of three per room. In the single apartments they range from four per room to as many as 12 per room, and in the room and kitchen houses, they range from six and seven to over 12 per house. That must produce results that are inimical to the welfare of the country, and it does not save you from spending money. You are spending money very freely, everywhere throughout Scotland, or in various parts of the country, in further extension of sanatoria and hospitals to deal with diseases. This overcrowding is illustrated by the fact that in a district in which I spent my very early infant days, there are 235 per thousand of the children born who die before they reach one year of age. Yet the standard for Glasgow was 107 per thousand. What are the diseases? They are respiratory diseases, tuberculosis in its various forms, measles and whooping cough. There the children are dying practically like flies. Through tuberculosis, three children die for one that dies in the well-to-do residential parts. Through measles, five die for one that dies in the well-to-do residential parts, and whooping cough causes as many as seven to die for one who dies in these other parts.
Does anyone think that you are going to escape the results of all this? You have to provide your child-welfare centres and your hospitals. There are thousands of children continuously pouring into and out of our infectious diseases hospitals, as a result of bad housing conditions. Every child is costing well over £1 a week and, in cases of
tuberculosis, about £2 a week. After you have cured them, you send them back to the conditions under which they have contracted those diseases. You have wasted your money, and then, after a short time, according to the statements which have been made to me by the medical officers, you get these children back once more to be treated for this sort of thing. This over-crowding is not a paying concern. It is producing a population that is inimical to the welfare of our country in every direction. Rickets, in the constituency that I have the honour to represent, are common. Anyone passing along the streets is bound to observe the considerable number of children and men and women, the results of the bad housing conditions, who are suffering from rickety conditions. According to the medical officer of Paisley, rickets is a consequence of poverty and bad environment, bad housing conditions, and you are allowing this overcrowding to go on and perpetuating this disease.
Even in your new houses, your people who have just come from the slums, to the extent of 28 per cent., are living in these houses under overcrowded conditions. They are bringing with them the very conditions that you have built these houses to remove. These people are ignorant in many cases; but we know better, and we are responsible because of our knowledge; and it is up to us and to every person in this House to redeem these conditions as speedily as possible. My charge against the Government is that in this respect they have failed in allowing these houses to go on. It may be true that the local authorities who control affairs at the moment are supine, and even hostile to an improved standard of housing, but I have yet to learn that the authority of the Board of Health of Scotland and its powers are so limited that they cannot use their power to deal with that recalcitrant body of local authorities. They have used it on other occasions when it was not so necessary as in this, and I do hope that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Under-Secretary, in replying to this discussion, will make it clear that the Government are determined, so far as the future is concerned, that no longer will they allow these conditions to obtain.
One point more. These people, in taking their poverty conditions into the new houses, are carrying with them the conditions which they suffered in their old dwellings. They are carrying verminous conditions with them, and all those carriers of disease enter into their new homes, and, because, through their poverty, they are not able to make provision for the new furniture and the clean beds that are necessary, we will be told in the near future that, because of their dirty habits and their inattention to personal cleanliness, they themselves are responsible for introducing these bad conditions into the new houses. So far as Glasgow is concerned, the problem grows worse and worse. When we investigated it in 1919, we discovered that there were 57,000 houses required immediately. To-day that has crept up until it is 107,000 houses. Cannot something be done to alter that kind of thing? The number of insanitary houses, according to the figures compiled in 1909 and 1910, were 13,000. That was 17 years ago. To-day, if we take the insanitary houses, despite your slum clearances, and your little efforts in that direction—which I am not disparaging and which I would not like to disparage although it is only a drop in a bucket—that number has increased to not less than 20,000 houses. When that is put into the common pool with regard to houses, you will see how rapidly and how extravagantly we are deteriorating in this direction.
There is one other matter to which want to refer, and that is the matter of farmed-out houses. We have a, considerable number of houses in Glasgow that are farmed out, and this is how it is done. A person takes a derelict property from the landlord, and becomes responsible for all the rent. The annual rental, as it appears in the Valuation Roll, that is paid for such properties at the moment, is over £7,000; but the rental that is charged to those to whom the property is sublet—the most helpless of people, the unemployed, the down and out, the people who for various reasons have lost their position in society—these people, through their poverty, are being compelled to pay £32,000 per annum as rent. Single apartments are let at from 10s. to 12s. per week—not per month—room-and-kitchen houses, so-called. Those who have not lived in them do
not realise what these houses are, but we who have served on public authorities and have taken our duties seriously, and those of us who have at some time or other in our lives been compelled to live under these conditions, know what this means. It means darkness and vileness of every description, and yet absolutely nothing is being done to deal with this situation.
I would ask the Government as early as possible to prevent these people from having to live in this degradation—I might use a stronger word, but it would be unparliamentary—and to, apply some compulsion in order that the rents they are charged may be reasonable. The people who live in these homes have no benefit under the Rent Acts; they are altogether outside the provisions of the Rent Acts, and there they are, helpless, with no one to give them consideration. The Medical Officers of the local authorities point out these things, but nobody, because it affects nobody, is concerned about altering the conditions. I might have gone on to say a great deal more with regard to housing and the health of the people, but other Members are desirous of speaking, and, perhaps of referring to the conditions in their districts. I hope, however, that I have said enough to call forth a sympathetic reply from those in charge, and a promise to deal with this condition which is the disgrace of Scotland.
Last year, when I had the privilege of visiting Australia, I discovered that the minimum condition of housing in Australia was a four-roomed house. Of the houses occupied by the working class, 53 per cent. were either four-roomed or five-roomed houses. It is a common thing in Australia for people of the working class to live in six or seven-roomed houses, and the rents are not so very different. In Adelaide, I saw a State housing scheme of 1,000 houses, built, not 40 to the acre, as they are being, or have been built in Glasgow by permission of the Government in the case of our housing scheme, but 4½ houses to the acre—nine houses to every two acres—the houses being of the bungalow type, with six rooms and all modern conveniences, and let at a rent of 19s. I visited every State in Australia, from Queensland to Tasmania. As I went on my travels, I
observed the children, and looked for signs of deterioration, but neither in the tropical part of Australia nor in the temperate part did I see during the whole of that visit one child suffering from rickets or showing signs of physical deterioration. With physical deterioration comes a deterioration of the intelligence; the one keeps company with the other; and it is a mistake to think that this country can survive with a poverty-striken people, pulled down through bad housing into a bad state of health and growing up stunted and dwarfed. If the time should come for a call to be made again, the C3 population will be there to a greater extent than ever, and, with a C3 population, you cannot hope to exist and you do not deserve to exist. We have the power; have we the will? If we have the will, we can accelerate the process of dealing with this problem and removing the terrible conditions that help to send me and others here to voice the complaints and the desires of a people who are dumb for themselves.

Mr. HARDIE: The last speaker on the other side made some references to the miners' stoppage, as if we had been discussing that or any of its effects to-day. It would seem, from the tone he adopted, that everyone who had led the miners had misled them, and we were led to believe that, if everything had been left in his hands, all would have been well with the workers. I want to refer to some questions which the Secretary of State for Scotland did not answer the last time I put them to him. I was told when I put them last time that he had not had time to get all the facts together, and I am hoping that to-day he will have got those facts, and will be able to give me an answer. If he will look at Volume 204 of the OFFICIAL REPORT, column 180, he will see a question that I put regarding the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act. I asked what was taking place, and I wonder if the right hon. Gentleman can tell us now what, under this Act, which helps a man to become the owner of his own house, the Government have been doing in the way of encouraging local authorities, or whatever bodies work the Act, how many houses have been taken up, and in. what districts they are to be found; and whether he can give us any information at all now about the working of this Act.
Yesterday the right hon. Gentleman made a very serious statement so far as we in Scotland are concerned. He tried to make the House of Commons believe that the reason why Glasgow has one-roomed or two-roomed apartment houses is that there is a demand for those houses. The way in which he put the answer implied that the ideas of a great many people in the city of Glasgow did not rise above a one- or two-apartment house. Perhaps he did not wish to imply that, but that is what has gone out in the Press, and that is the impression created in the Scottish Press. I want at once to deny that statement. The ideal of housing in any of the strata of the citizens of Glasgow is higher than a one-roomed house or a two-roomed house; but the reason why you get the one-roomed house is that the wages or earnings are such that people cannot afford to pay the rent of a bigger house. Why should the poverty which is imposed upon these people be used to slur over the conditions under which they are by compulsion living to-day? I hope the Secretary of State for Scotland will make this quite clear when he replies.
The right hon. Gentleman answered a question also in relation to the attendance of children in schools, as to the numbers in the classes. If the Secretary of State and those who assist him will watch the question of housing congestion and the size of classes in schools they will find—and I have had 15 years' experience in connection with education in Glasgow—that, whenever a school is in a congested area, you get a reflex of that congestion in the numbers in the classes in the school; you get the biggest classes where there is the biggest congestion of one or two-roomed houses. When we are dealing with the education question from the point of view of the size of classes, we are dealing with a housing problem. A housing problem lies to-day at the basis of the large classes that are to be found in these areas in Glasgow and other big cities. When we come to-night to the education section of these Estimates, one of my hon. Friends will deal in detail with the figures regarding the size of the classes. What I am trying to impress now upon the Secretary of State is that those in charge have always neglected this most tangible
relation between area congestion and school congestion.
There is one point more that I wish to make in relation to the educational side. It is no use a nation painting red and blue and advertising what it is spending on education unless at the same time you can prove to the nation whose money you take to spend—and we approve of it—that that money is being so spent that the children can absorb the financial effort made by the nation. Having, while I was engaged in that class of work, visited every school in Glasgow during every hour that they were in session, I was made to realise that, where you found a child being punished, a child that was in trouble with the school teacher, you always found that that child came from a home, so called, which was a one- or two-roomed apartment, where it was impossible for the mother, owing to the housing conditions, to get her children into the frame of mind necessary for attending school, and to give them the satisfaction that their stomachs desire in the morning, so as to leave them mentally free; because a child that has a craving for something to eat cannot concentrate, no matter how interesting the lesson may be. I speak now from personal experience on that point.
I will leave that, and come to the general question of housing. I put a question to the Secretary of State for Scotland some time ago, and I am hoping he does not presume that I forget when I put a question. I am presuming, too, that he does not forget either, and that, as he did not give the answer because he had not any information, he will not think I am pressing him too hard if I expect the answer now. I put a question in regard to houses built of materials other than brick, concrete or stone, and my question was in relation to the fires which had occurred in houses in Bo'ness called steel houses. I asked, but could not get an answer, what the specification was in regard to the supposed fireproof partitions. It is true that the Secretary of State said that he had got the report. Yes, but the report is no answer to the question I put. The report is the surveyor's report as to what took place, not as to whether the materials were fireproof or not. What I asked was, what was the specification? Did not that specification say that all these partitions
were to be so lined with asbestos as to render them fireproof? Of course, asbestos is not fireproof, as was found in the Bo'ness fire, when the asbestos burned and gave the houses colliwobbles. That is all that can happen when you get a fire inside a wooden house lined with asbestos. It is like a colliwobble. You get them like a concertina if you pour water on the outside shell when it is hot. But what I am after is the safety of the people who are compelled to live in such houses. I want to know whether the methods now adopted have been improved or whether the same conditions exist as in the house at Bo'ness or whether something is being done to prevent what happened there. The question I raised will be found in Volume 202, col. 1486. It does not seem to me a very unreasonable demand when a Member of the House asks what is being done in these houses other than brick, stone or concrete, because we have been told so many tales—I use the word without apologies—about what was going to happen, but every time I am in Scotland I visit the places where these houses are, and I am not blind.
I remember the first time I referred to that type of house and the statement I made in regard to what would happen under that mode of construction. That firm saw that what I said was true, and all the houses that have been built since are built with the sheet projecting over the foundation so that the water drips off. They did not write to acknowledge it because they were Scottish people, and I did not expect it. I should like to know whether these houses have been put up, how long they are up, and how they are getting on. The Under-Secretary said it would be a fine place for testing that type of house where they would be rain-washed and wind-swept. The Secretary for Scotland has a tremendous responsibility. He is not going to be excused because he represents the better housed part of Glasgow. The major portion of his constituents have no need to worry, because they can all get the houses they want, but that should not blind him to the other parts of the city. At every move that is made you meet a landlord. Every time we ask for a clearance we are met by a landlord, and if you clear a space of any kind the rents go up, because the
landlords say, "Look at the fine space," as if they had made it and paid for it. I should like the Secretary of State to be quite definite on this question. How are they going to take this type of landlord by the neck and tell him the citizens come first, and the landlords come last?

Mr. KIRKWOOD: This question of housing is a vexed question. I have put several questions in the last week or two regarding housing conditions in Clydebank, where we are up against the poverty problem. Clydebank has passed through a very bad period of unemployment for years. Within the last year or so trade has taken a turn, and now the council are very anxious to build houses, but the rate of interest for the money they have to borrow means high rents. Clydebank is essentially a working-class town. It is where the money is made, but not retained. I have appealed to the best of my ability, through questions, to the Scottish Office to help us out of this tight corner. The Speaker informed me that it was not a matter for question and answer, but should be debated at the proper time. This is the proper time. I hold the Secretary of State responsible for the health of my constituency in particular and of Scotland in general. How can people be healthy, happy and contented if they have nowhere to lay their heads? You read in the Bible how, over 2,000 years ago, He was a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, and He said: "The birds of the air have their nests, but the Son of Man bath nowhere to lay His head." If He were in Scotland to-day He would find that there are thousands of people who have nowhere to lay their heads. No one has a right to draw salaries of thousands a year and to live in mansions when the people who make the money have nowhere to lay their heads. I took the matter up with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see if he would do something to assist my constituency, which has rendered yeoman service to the British Empire. I have a letter signed by him which I am sending on to the town council. It is the usual push-off, though not the hard, cast-iron, matter-of-fact reply we get from the Secretary of State. It is a lengthy reply, but it does not give us
the cash. I do not want anyone's smile of kindness. When we want money we want money, and we are not beggars. We are not coming here begging either to the Chancellor of the Exchequer or anyone else. We are only asking the rights of the people.
As I say, this is a poverty problem. If we had tens of thousands of houses empty the people would not be allowed to occupy them unless they could pay the rent for them. Is it because there is a scarcity of food in the West of Scotland that there are children starving? I went on a deputation to Edinburgh in the heart of the winter appealing on behalf of 700 children who were going to school in Dumbartonshire barefoot in such a winter as we have passed through. Was it because there is a shortage of boots? No. The shops are packed with boots. Never were there more boots, not only in Scotland but all over Great Britain. It is the same with clothes. It is not because there is a shortage of the necessaries and comforts of life. If we build houses, as long as the Tory Government are in power we shall be up against this same trouble. The housing conditions of Scotland are a standing disgrace to you.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Lieut.-Colonel Spender-Clay): I must ask the hon. Member to address the Chair.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I hope you will not look at me severely, although it will make no difference to me. The right hon. Gentleman is here to-day for us to put him through it and you will not save him. He is responsible to our people and we are sent here to make his life miserable. We are sent here to roast him and toast him to the best of our ability, and that is what we are going to do. Housing in Scotland is a disgrace, and the responsibility rests on the shoulders of the Secretary of State. We gleaned yesterday that in England they are not allowed to build two-apartment houses and we were told that in Scotland they are clamouring for them. The right hon. Gentleman had to admit that it was because the people cannot pay the rents. It is not because the Scottish mothers are not as good as English mothers. They are as good, every bit; yet the
infantile death rate is higher than in England. The Secretary of State and his understudy ought to think shame of themselves because they have done absolutely nothing to try to relieve housing conditions.
May I turn to another vexed question, that of unemployment? What has this Government done to relieve the strain of unemployment? I have travelled the length and breadth of Britain. I have addressed audiences all over England, Scotland, Wales, and even in Ireland, and nowhere do I see such sad faces, so many crushed men and women, as I see in Glasgow and in the West of Scotland, and in Newcastle. It was my fate a week ago to-morrow night to address two huge meetings in Newcastle, and there I saw just the same type of men and women, men and women who are starving, who have gone through years of starvation, underfed and underclothed. Terrible are the housing conditions. They are just the same as they are in Glasgow and in the West of Scotland.
To come to the question of unemployment, I want to tell the Committee that unemployment is worse in Scotland than it is in England. One would think that the powers that be have tried to do what they can to make it harder for our people in Scotland than it is for the people in England. Here are the conditions. It is the official statement gleaned from the Ministry of Labour:
Unemployment to-day is considerably greater in Scotland than in England. This unsatisfactory state of national affairs is not a new development but has existed since the great slump in business which occurred in 1921, an aftermath of the Great War.
For the week ending 19th April, 1926, according to the figures of the Ministry of Labour, the number of unemployed—

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: I am afraid I must call the hon. Member to order again, because this Vote has nothing whatever to do with unemployment.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Oh, that is where you are making a great mistake, and I challenge your ruling.

Mr. JOHNSTON: On a point of Order. May I draw your attention to the fact that we are now discussing the Annual Report of the Scottish Board of Health, and that Chapter 16 of the Table of Contents has many references to employment
and unemployment, and I trust that you will allow my hon. Friend to proceed?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: We are discussing at this moment Class 5, Vote 14.

Mr. JOHNSTON: We are discussing, as I understand it, everything covered by the Vote for the Scottish Board of Health.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: I do not see that that has anything to do with it.

Mr. JOHNSTON: May I call your attention to the fact that in the Annual Report of the Scottish Board of Health for 1926, Chapter 16 of the Table of Contents has many references relating to unemployment and the general strike.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: I would like to hear what the Under-Secretary of State has to say on this point.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Major Elliot): On that point, references are made to it in so far as it is affected by the Poor Law question. The question, as far as I understand it, that the hon. Member was discussing was a question which would fall under the Ministry of Labour Estimates. It is quite true to say that, as far as the Poor Law is concerned, these particular problems come under the Board, but the general state of unemployment has nothing whatever to do with the Vote.

Mr. B. SMITH: On a point of Order. Is the Minister governing the Committee or is the Chairman?

Major ELLIOT: I was asked for an opinion on what was a technical matter contained in the Report. I have a perfect right to answer questions on technical matters arising out of the subject discussed by the hon. Member.

Mr. SULLIVAN: On a point of Order. I want the Under-Secretary to tell us whether the Scottish Board of Health is not responsible for relief work? Their failure to provide relief work has added to unemployment.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Further to that point of Order. May I draw your attention to the fact that on page 274 of that Report there is a paragraph dealing with employment
during the general strike, a succeeding paragraph dealing with subsidiary unemployment, and so on, and I submit that if we are not going to be allowed to discuss unemployment under public health we are going to be put to considerable inconvenience.

Mr. BUCHANAN: May I submit that the question of unemployment is fundamental to this Report? We cannot discuss any part of the Report without discussing that question. Take the question of housing. One question is a person's ability to pay rent. Rent cannot be paid unless employment is good. Take the questions of Poor Law and National Health Insurance. Take even the question of the Poor Law. The Board of Health insist on certain work being done. The whole question of unemployment runs right through this Report. Chapter 18 of the Report deals with Poor Law administration and with unemployment. In the summary, "Unemployment Workmen's Act, 1909; State-assisted schemes of relief work; poor relief during the coal mining dispute; the relief of destitute able-bodied unemployed." This is all dealing with unemployment, and it is a problem that cannot be separated. The Chair on a Report of this kind has in the past allowed the widest possible latitude in discussion.

The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. William Watson): May I suggest that those are two totally different things? It is one thing to discuss unemployment, and another thing to seek to apportion blame for unemployment, or the failure to do things to mitigate unemployment, and discuss that. The hon. Member who had possession of the Committee, as I understood him, was discussing whether the Government or my right hon. Friend had done anything to mitigate unemployment. That, surely, is a question for general Debate on the Ministry of Labour Vote. In a discussion of this Vote, to try and apportion blame for the condition of unemployment is, I submit, entirely out of order.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: My ruling is, that the report which has been alluded to is not before the Committee. I further rule that while I should allow allusion to unemployment, I cannot possibly allow a general discussion on unemployment at this stage.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Are we allowed to discuss anything? [Interruption.]

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: On a point of Order. With regard to the details of the Vote, I take it, it will be in order to discuss the grants to parish councils in respect of poor relief, which shows an increase of £260,000?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Yes, certainly.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: With your permission—we have to ask your permission—I want to tell you that you are the first Chairman who has even given a ruling like that on a Scottish day. This is again proof that the sooner we get Home Rule for Scotland the better. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] Then why do you vote it down every time we bring it forward? You are only a lot of "cods." I was about to say that Scotland had 63 per cent. more unemployment than England, and I was going to give the figures, and it is evident I have disturbed the conscience of the Secretary of State for Scotland. That is quite evident, because the Under-Secretary was not very long in jumping to his feet. And the Lord Advocate, the last of all men in Great Britain, tries at that Box to enter the discussion and give us legal advice without being paid for it. It is the first time that that has happened in the history of Scotland. I have put questions time after time regarding the law, and the Under-Secretary once wrote to me telling me that w e could not get information on points of law because they required to be paid for it. That is what they say, but here the Lord Advocate comes forward. So that you see there are wheels within wheels working now. The reason that I brought in unemployment is because of the extraordinary amount of unemployment, and because, owing to the long period of years it has been in existence, it has undermined the health of the people of this country.
6.0 p.m.
That is why, on this Health Vote, I considered it was permissible to bring forward this question, but you, Sir, have evidently received special training or instructions to put us down at the very first possible opportunity. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] I will "order" as I like. [Interruption.] We are just ready to go over the top [Interruption.]
We will deal fairly with you, but if you start to put the screw on we will let You know we do not care one button for you. This is something that is of vital importance to us. The fate of our country hangs in the balance as far as this Vote is concerned. We see the awful housing conditions in Scotland. I know that the housing conditions of England are bad, but to-day we are dealing particularly with our native land. If it were India, Egypt, Russia, or any other country over the sea, the benches opposite would be filled, but because it is Scotland the benches are only scantily occupied. No one takes any interest in it, the reason being that the impression has been created that we get more than our share. Such is not the case. We do not get our share. We get more than our share of unemployment. All the proceeds of the taxation in Scotland come down to London. Everything comes to London, and we are stripped bare and do not get the share we ought to get. What do we find at the moment as the result of unemployment? We have appealed time and time again to the Secretary of State and to his office to help us. The ruling class say we are passing through a bad period. It has been a bad period ever since this Government came into office. Has the Secretary of State for Scotland done anything to assist the working classes of Scotland? Absolutely nothing. His Government have done nothing to assist the working classes of Scotland. What do we find? We find that our people are poorer. The wages paid are less than the wages paid in England. We find that our working folk are back below the standard they were before the War. Take the engineers. They are worse than they were before the War. In those days it was said that an engineer's rise was one farthing an hour. At this moment the employers in that trade are offering an increase in wages which works out at just about one farthing an hour, and, compared with the purchasing power before the War, it means that they are being offered one-eighth of a penny increase per hour. The Tories promised the engineers, when the War was over, that all was going to be better than well, that they were going to have a chance in life which they had never had before. Instead of that the engineers have been
cut down; they are in a worse position than they were before the War, and it, seems to me that the Secretary of State has no intention of doing anything to mitigate the terrible conditions which prevail. He is afraid to raise his voice in the Cabinet and put in a claim for Scotland. He should see that we get our fair share—and we are not getting it at the moment. If it was his own class, the rich class in Scotland, to whom the screw was being applied, I am satisfied that the representatives of Scotland in this Government would do their best to meet the case, but because it is the working classes, the poor people, they do nothing. Think of the illustration I gave to the hard and stony heart of the Secretary of State. I led a deputation of the educational authorities of Dumbarton, not Socialists, not Labour men, appealing for 700 school children, who, in the dead of winter, were going to school without boots, or shoes or stockings. Would that occur in London? No fear. But that is what is happening in our part of the world; and the Secretary of State is doing absolutely nothing. This Government has done nothing for Scotland, and it is therefore the duty of the people of Scotland to turn them out; they are absolutely no use to us.

Mr. SULLIVAN: I should like to draw attention to the statement made by the Secretary of State for Scotland yesterday in connection with the housing problem. I am sure that he hardly realises to what he was committing himself when he gave permission for the erection of two-apartment houses. He defended it on the ground that there was a clamant demand for these houses. In the matter of housing we appear to have to abide by the dictum of the Secretary of State. At the present time some 62 per cent. of our people are living in houses of not more than two apartments, and the Secretary of State says there is a clamant demand for more of these two-apartment houses. Surely, if there is that percentage living in this kind of house, that is quite enough, and we should go in for building bigger and better houses and gradually raise the standard of living of our people. We have at the present time far too many of these small houses; our great need is to raise the standard of our people. We had the best return, so far as housing accommodation
is concerned, last year, but we have not yet got anywhere near meeting the needs of the situation. I feel that something ought to be done to quicken up public authorities in this matter. Even if I admitted that there was something in the demand for these small houses, if I look on page 48 of the Report of the Scottish Board of Health, I find that the only difference between a three-roomed house and a two-roomed house is £24. That is all the difference there is between a big house and the smaller house, and yet the Secretary of State wants us to believe that this is the only thing that is required in order to create a state of affluence in Scotland.
We have always met with great difficulties when erecting houses in the mining areas. We have to choose the site, and then get a report on the minerals lying underneath the site. These reports are obtained from the best qualified men we can get in Scotland. They tell us that there is mineral below but it will not pay to work it, and we are quite safe in going on with the erection of the houses. But, once the house is put up, then it is found that it will pay to work the minerals, and the local authorities are blackmailed. I have one place in mind in which the owner who had given the land for the houses had leased the minerals to somebody else, and the somebody else discovered that it would pay to work the mineral under the houses. He demanded a sum of £28 per house as blackmail for allowing them to stand. Apparently the Government have no hesitation in allowing public authorities to be blackmailed in this way, to the extent of £28 per house, but when it is a question Of a difference of £24 per house as between a three-roomed house and a two-roomed house, we are told that there is a clamant demand for the small house.
I desire to say one word on the question of unemployment, and in doing so I do not wish to transgress any ruling of the Chair. We are grieved with a larger measure of unemployment in Scotland than in any other part of the country, and we feel that public authorities, and the Scottish Board of Health, should do something to alleviate the conditions of the people. I would much rather pay a man for doing work than pay money for
doing nothing. I have always told our people that it is a very bad thing to get money in that way. I would much rather pay a man £3 a week for doing some work than pay him 30s. a week for doing no work at all. It is the duty of the Scottish Board of Health to inaugurate schemes of employment, and they should compel public authorities to prepare schemes, because in that way we shall be keeping the people fit for the time when they may be able to get permanent work. There is a lot of loose talk on the question of unemployment and relief. This Government, and previous Governments, have compelled public authorities in Scotland to pay relief to unemployed people, and during the last five years it has amounted to £5,370,415. That is something to think about. In five years we have paid to able-bodied persons a sum of over £5,000,000. We suggest that something should be done to lessen that amount, or that some profitable return should be secured for that expenditure. However, we are told that we have no right to discuss it. We shall be compelled to face that question some time or other.
Last Monday I put a question to the Secretary of State as to the number of unemployed there were in the County of Lanark. I was told that there were 12,711 miners unemployed. I should have been satisfied with that reply had I not known the working of the official mind too well, and I, therefore, asked them how many able-bodied people were unemployed in the county, and the answer I got was 21,000, with 45,000 dependants. That is a condition of affairs which is not at all satisfactory in any area, and something will have to be done to meet such a condition of unemployment. We are raising up a generation which has never worked, which does not know what work is. What they may turn out in the years to come I cannot tell. They may turn out to be aristocrats or they may turn out to be something else at the other end of the scale. Everybody should get a fair amount of work to do, good and steady work. The condition of the mining industry was also raised in connection with the non-payment of rent.
I should like to hear more of the human touch and more of the human note in the reply of the Secretary of State. The situation is becoming very bad, and
it may get worse. There is this other aspect of the question. A number of men who have not been working for years cannot pay their rent, and it is unfair to suggest that the owners of property should carry that burden, but with the amount of relief being given either through the bureau or the parish councils it is utterly impossible for rents to be paid. I hope the Secretary of State will devise some scheme for meeting that difficulty, or in a short time we shall be face to face with wholesale evictions. When that occurs everybody will be anxious to do something to prevent such evictions, but I think it is better to take action before that situation arises.
Another matter to which I wish to draw attention is the pollution of rivers. I was born in the country and have lived my life in the country, and I wish to see our rivers kept pure and clean. An unclean river tends to create disease on the banks of the river and near by. In this Report the officials of the Scottish Board of Health state they have discovered rivers which are in a bad state. There are two ways in which a river becomes impure. In the first place local authorities may discharge into the river sewage which has not been purified. The remedy for that state of affairs lies in the hands of the Scottish Board of Health, because no public authority ought to be allowed to poison streams in that way. The Board have the power to compel them to abstain from it if they have the will to do so. The other method of pollution is the worse way. Collieries or dye-works or some other factories may be erected near a river. The refuse from those places must not be discharged into this stream, but what do the owners do? They dam back their refuse for a time, and then, when the river is in flood some night, they open the sluices and everything goes into the river. Complaints have been made that local authorities have not prosecuted those people? I should like the Lord Advocate to think over this point. I understand that local authorities have not the power to prosecute under the law. I repeat that statement because I have very good authority for it. If the law is defective it is up to the Lord Advocate to get the law altered.
Now I want to give a little credit. I have been very much interested in the dreadful disease phthisis, and I am
pleased to notice that in 10 years the death rate has been reduced. That shows what can be done if we tackle the problem in the right way; but though we have made wonderful progress I still must complain of the fact that with 12,000 cases there are only 4,000 beds. There is only one way of dealing with phthisis, and that is to make a beginning in the homes of the people. The people afflicted must not be left in one-apartment or two-apartment houses; if they have to be left at home, they must be completely isolated. It is because we have not dealt with the homes of the people that we require so much hospital accommodation. In spite of the improvement in the situation, the hospital accommodation is not yet what it ought to be, and I hope that in the coming year the authorities will give some attention to that aspect of the question. I regret that we have to take the line we have taken in connection with Scottish affairs, but our opportunities are very limited. I sometimes think it would be much better for us if we had not the Board of Health in Edinburgh. We might get more done through dealing directly with the people at the top. Those persons, as a rule, try to practise the great virtue of thrift at the expense of the poor people, instead of insisting that the arrears of housing ought to be made up.

Mr. BUCHANAN: In associating myself with the statements which have been made by my colleagues I want to direct the attention of the Committee to one other point which has not been dealt with so far. No one can read the Report of the Scottish Board of Health, dealing with a number of Scottish problems without feeling a mixture of sorrow, anguish and anger at the present condition of Scotland. Reference has been made by the right hon. Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson) and the hon. Member for St. Rollox (Mr. J. Stewart) to the revelations in the Report of the terrible housing conditions in Glasgow. I do not want to add to those harrowing details, because everyone knows the conditions. When we first came to the House the conditions were not so very well known, but through constant propaganda in the Press, on the platform, and in the House of Commons much more attention has now been attracted to this problem. I am not
going to recite facts about child welfare in the Gorbals Division of Glasgow, which I represent. In its way, it is possibly the most poverty-stricken Division in the whole of the country; there is hardly one well-to-do person within its borders. For every four children who die in that Division, only one dies in the neighbouring ward of Cathcart, less than a mile away. That is not because the people in the Gorbals are Jews or Irish or Scots, or Roman Catholic, or Protestant, or of no religious belief at all. One thing that rich and poor, black and white, Catholic and Protestant have in common is the love of the parents for their children, and why we have this fearful death rate in our midst is not because the poor are more drunken than the rich, or love their children less than the rich, but because of the cruel housing conditions and the cruel poverty which are ever in our midst in the city of Glasgow.
The Secretary of State for Scotland has been complimented on the fact that more houses have been erected in Glasgow this year. But how far do they suffice to meet the problem? In the city of Glasgow fewer than 10,000 houses have been built since 1919. Even if 50,000 had been built it would not have solved the problem, because the people who are admittedly the worst housed are the poorest people, and although slum clearance schemes have been undertaken even the accommodation provided in that way is too dear for the pockets of the poorest of the people. In Scotland last year 35,000 adults able-bodied, destitute unemployed—with 83,000 dependants, were receiving Poor Law relief. The Secretary of State for Scotland issued a circular to the parish councils stating "You parish councils have been too generous to the unemployed. Some of you have come along and added 2s., 3s., 48., or 5s. to the 23s. a week which is the amount of the Employment Exchange money." The Secretary of State for Scotland, for whom some people think £2,000 a year is not sufficient, says to another man, just as good a man as he is, and to a woman, just as good a wife as his wife is, "This parish council, which has been adding 2s., 3s., or 4s. a week to the 23s., is doing wrong. It shall not be allowed to augment that 23s."
Figures, which I received in an answer to-day, show that in Peterhead Prison it costs £101 per annum, or 35s. a week, to keep one prisoner—not his wife, but himself alone. In Duke St. Prison it costs 30s., and in Barlinnie Prison 19s. a week, to keep a man. It costs 35s. a week to keep a criminal and an outcast in Peterhead Prison, but a man who is clean and of good character and keeps out of prison must keep himself and his wife on 23s. a week, according to the Secretary of State for Scotland. He builds slum clearance houses, and is complimented on the work. What is the rent asked for them? In the constituency in Glasgow represented by the Under-Secretary, the rent and rates of a slum clearance house amount at the lowest to 9s. a week. How is any man, however diligent, careful and frugal, to keep his wife and himself and pay such a rent as that out of 23s. a week?
The people cannot pay the rent and they are faced with two alternatives. In the first place, either they have to clear out and leave their new abode or starve, or take in lodgers, thus overcrowding the dwellings into which they have just been placed. Half of the occupants of slum clearance schemes in Glasgow are men whose average period of work during the last five years is certainly not more than one week in two. The lowest rent for these subsidised houses is £26 10s., and if you add the rates the least these poor people will have to pay will be 17s. per week for rent and rates. How many engineers can pay that rent out of their present earnings? How many engineers who have had the luck of steady work, earning £2 10s. or £2 15s. per week, can afford to pay a rent of that sort? The Secretary of State for Scotland can go on building houses, but unless with the building of those houses you do something to remedy the poverty of the people, how are they going to meet the rent which is charged? Unless this is done the mere problem of housing cannot be solved.
I know that the Under-Secretary may say that the Board of Health did not compel the parish council to make the scale in the case I have mentioned 23s. a week for a family, plus 2s. a week for each child, but I would like to know who set that standard. Is the Secretary of
State for Scotland going to withdraw that Regulation and allow the parish council to increase that allowance? The authorities I am speaking about have not yet come anywhere near the Chesterle-Street or the West Ham scale of expenditure. Some of these authorities put the scale up to 31s., in the case of a man with two children, and then the Secretary for Scotland issued a circular telling them that 31s. a week was too much and they would have to come down to 27s. or he would have to take steps to curtail their expenditure. I ascertained the other day by means of an answer from the Solicitor-General for Scotland that it costs 35s. a week to keep a boy in the Stranraer Reformatory. That is what is costs to maintain a criminal and I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is satisfied with a position in which it costs 35s. a week to maintain a criminal when a man and his wife with two children only receive 27s.
I hope the Secretary of State for Scotland is not going to be complacent about that position. It is not necessary for the Under-Secretary to reel off figures as to how many houses have been built and how many are going to be built. The proper thing to do is to face effectively this general problem of the poverty of the people. I might have raised the question of the blind population, and I am glad to say in this connection that the Secretary of State for Scotland and the local authorities are taking more active steps to deal with the blind population than was the case many years ago. I would like to ask what is happening to the older blind people who have nothing but a pension to live upon. In view of the important problems connected with Poor Law administration, housing, and the blind population, I think it is time that the Secretary of State for Scotland and his Department became a great deal more active and insistent in trying to solve many of the terribly cruel problems affecting our native land.

Major ELLIOT: It is customary on an occasion like this to have a review, as far as possible, of the administration of Scotland during the period covered so far as it comes under my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. It is true that, although many of the subjects raised fall under the direct administration
of my right hon. Friend, there are some subjects which do not come under his administration on this Vote, and I should be out of order in discussing them at the present moment. It is quite true, as the last speaker and many other speakers have said that all this comes down in the long run to the question of poverty. I think there is a general agreement upon the subject. But this is no place for a general statement as to the causes of that poverty. We must take the question line by line and letter by letter in order to see whether any particular definite things can be submitted to this House and see whether any definite arguments can be brought forward to controvert equally definite arguments put forward on the other side. I can assure the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) that there is no desire on our part to shirk the discussion of any question which he may raise. I think when the hon. Member for Dumbarton reads the OFFICIAL REPORT he will be ready to admit that he strayed somewhat from the mark in his speech. I know it is difficult for the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs to discuss what he wishes and to keep within the rules of Parliamentary order in the masterly manner of the hon. Member for Bridgeton. [interruption.] I am sure the hon. Member for the Bridgeton Division (Mr. Maxton) would find no difficulty in discussing any subject connected or unconnected with any particular subject before the House.

The CHAIRMAN: This appears to be a reflection on all the occupants of the Chair.

Major ELLIOT: If I am not in order in complimenting the hon. Member for Bridgeton on his Parliamentary skill then I claim it is an error I have fallen into in good company, because I have heard that compliment paid from higher sources than myself. Admitting as we all do that the question of poverty is at the root of all the problems of our modern industrialism and civilisation we come to the specific questions which have been raised this afternoon. Certain questions were raised by the hon. Member for Dumbarton with a fair amount of heat. Perhaps he will excuse me going into details upon some of the questions which he raised because they are subjects which I cannot reply to on this Vote.
The general question of trade depression which has been affecting Scotland for several years is one which has been dealt with on this Vote and upon which criticisms have been made throughout the Debate by hon. Members on both sides of the House. If we test this matter by statistics we find that there has been an increase in the health of the people a steady fall in sickness and an improvement in nearly all the great questions affected by the administration of Scotland. In regard to these matters we have been able to maintain our past standard and we have not gone back upon that standard even in the stress of deep industrial depression. I think that is a very remarkable thing and however much we all desire that things should be better we must recognise the fact that we have made some progress. I agree that this Debate should spur us on to make greater progress, but that progress has been made is undeniable, and it has been made in the face of the greatest difficulties.
When I find hon. Members reflecting upon the Board of Health it seems to me that it is quite appropriate for the responsible Minister to say that I do not think any more public spirited body of civil servants exist anywhere in this country. They have given their time unstintingly to the administration of Scottish affairs. In regard to some of the questions raised by the hon. Member, the Board of Health have no executive responsibility. The responsibility falls upon the Secretary of State for Scotland and myself and we shall not shirk the task of justifying our policy whenever the occasion arises. The Board of Health is not responsible for decisions of policy. The sole responsibility for policy rests with the Secretary of State and it is to him that such criticisms should be addressed.
I would like to give some figures dealing with tuberculosis. In 1926 the ordinary death-rate per 100,000 of the population in non-pulmonary cases fell. It was 34 in 1925 and 30 in 1926. The death-rate per 100,000 of the population from all forms of tuberculosis fell from 110 in 1925 to 99 in 1926. There were as compared with 1916, 1,744 fewer people died from pulmonary tuberculosis and 1,071 fewer from non-pulmonary tuberculosis; making a total of 2,815 fewer deaths
from tuberculosis in 1926, as compared with 1916. I think that is a most remark able figure. The number of beds definitely reserved for the treatment of tuberculosis is steadily rising, and we have now 4,339 beds, as compared with 4,170 at the end of 1925, an increase of 169 beds. The provision of tuberculosis beds is continuing and a number will come into use in relief of the problem in the course of the next few months or the next year.
As for infantile mortality, that also continues to fall. The infantile mortality was 83 per 1,000 or eight less than the rate in 1925 and nine less than the rate for the immediately preceding five years. and 13 less than the rate for the preceding 10 years. It is the lowest rate on record except that for 1923. That fact also is worth remembering considering that, last year, we had the tremendous depression in the coal trade and unemployment weighing on the country. The other question which it is necessary for us to review is that of housing. That question has been referred to by many speakers, and on that, I think I may say, that in the Board's Report we have not in any way ignored the desperate and appalling state of housing in many places in Scotland. It has not been our policy in any way to cover up that festering sore. Unless public opinion is continually reminded of the necessity of dealing with this problem there is danger that we may fall into what one hon. Member has described as a state of complacency. I think complacency is the last word that could be applied to the Secretary of State for Scotland in this regard. He has been untiring in his efforts to forward the solution of this problem and to bring the facts to the notice of the authorities, and he has taken steps of a very drastic kind on more than one occasion which have not always commended themselves to hon. Members opposite. What do the figures show? Last year we have the largest number of houses ever built in one year in Scotland, and we were able, for the first time, to do something towards catching up with the arrears as well as dealing with the current wastage. The figures show that this year, up to the end of June or perhaps the beginning of July, we have succeeded in building the whole of the year's requirements for Scotland,
and every house built from now to the end of the year will be a clear gain and will go towards the reduction of arrears. We have built practically 10,000 houses and 10,000 is given as the extreme figure for the year's wastage, so that every house from now until the end of December will go towards wiping out this shocking condition of which every Scotsman must be ashamed.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: How many will that be from now until January?

Major ELLIOT: It will be more if the hon. member and myself co-operate, instead of spending our time slinging controversy at each other across the Floor of the House.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: But how many?

Major ELLIOT: I have every hope—though it must be remembered that exigencies have to be allowed for—that we may be able to build another 6,000. We might hope for more than that, but I am not going to boast, because I know anything of that kind which is said here is taken down and will, next year, be used in evidence against me.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: That figure of 6,000 will be used in evidence against you.

Major ELLIOT: That may be, but we have taken steps to see What can be done in that matter. As the hon. Member knows, the Government has itself promoted schemes of housing by alternative methods, not one of which has houses of less than the three-roomed, kitchenette-type. No house for which we are personally responsible is less than a three-roomed house. The steel houses, against which so many attacks have been made, have three rooms each, and it comes poorly from hon. Members who at times have expressed themselves very bitterly with regard to these houses, to launch unbridled denunciations of what are after all three-roomed houses when smaller houses have been permitted where they are erected by the traditional methods of construction. The only fault which has been alleged with regard to that is that perhaps too much attention has been paid to public opinion in Scotland. In Scotland the two-roomed houses have not been built by the Government. 7,000 two-roomed houses have been built by local authorities.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: You gave them the power to build those houses and you could have refused.

Major ELLIOT: Let me point out to the hon. Member that which he probably knows very well because he keeps up very closely to these matters, that his Government also gave the power to build these houses.

Mr. MAXTON: Does that settle the principle for ever?

Major ELLIOT: No, I do not say that.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: We protested against our Government doing it.

Major ELLIOT: It is well known that protests by back benchers are not taken too seriously by a Government unless the back benchers go to the extreme length of moving into the Division Lobby.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: We went into the Division Lobby.

The CHAIRMAN: I must ask the hon. Member to let the Under-Secretary finish his observations. If he is still unsatisfied he can speak again.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I do not wish to interrupt but you are to understand, Mr. Chairman, that this is a matter in which two Scotsmen are concerned and an Englishman has no right to interfere.

The CHAIRMAN: The present position in that respect cannot be altered without legislation and cannot be discussed now.

Major ELLIOT: I deplore, as much as anyone, the condition of housing in Scotland, but I say that these two-roomed houses are of a different class to the houses of a previous generation. The new houses are undoubtedly superior in every way. They have water supply and sanitary accommodation, space, light and air. They are not the "but and bens" to which we have been accustomed, and it is necessary to take that fact into account. I have always felt deeply the point—which was raised by another hon. Member—that the poorest people are those for whom the least is being done. None of us can go to see a new housing scheme of beautiful villas with gardens and even garages and all the amenities and comforts of civilisation without reflecting that the people living in those
houses are being subsidised out of the taxes and the rates and are thus receiving assistance from the poorest of the poor, who, in many cases are not themselves receiving the advantages for which they are paying. That is a position which we have done our best to impress on local authorities—that they must deal with the people who are "down and out." The public landlord just like the private landlord prefers to build houses for the man with the long purse who can pay the rent. In a public administration we find that the public authority falls into exactly the same position as that indicated in the accusations made against private enterprise. This shows the clamant necessity of bringing down the cost of the houses. We must have houses at a cost which will bring them within the reach of the poorest.
That is a matter for co-operation on all sides, and recent quotations have shown that the price of houses can fall and that there is a margin within which prices can come down, without any question of the wages payable to those who are working at the erection of the houses being brought down. We have found on many occasions a striking drop between the price of the house on the first tender and the price of the house on the second tender when the objections of the Board of Health had been brought forward or when a certain amount of restriction has been employed. In all these things we have to use care. If you took off all the restrictions you would find the price soaring up. If you over-restrict you bring about delays and the number of houses produced is insufficient. All these are questions of administration, and in regard to all of them you have to proceed from day to day, from week to week, and from month to month without laying down any fixed or rigid principles which are going to tie your hands when dealing with these difficult problems.
Many specific questions were raised by Members in the course of the discussion. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson) in particular referred to rural housing and hoped that steps would be taken by personal propaganda to acquaint the members of rural local authorities with the powers which have been conferred in that respect. That has been done and we hope to be able to continue doing it. Nearly all the rural
local authorities have submitted schemes or have now got schemes in operation. We cannot yet say what is actually being done under those schemes, but a most hopeful and optimistic outlook prevailed among the local authorities at the Inverness Conference and they discussed not a rate of one penny but rates of threepence, fourpence and even fivepence for housing purposes in a way which I never heard rural authorities discuss that subject before. The right hon. Gentleman also mentioned the Highlands and islands Fund. That fund has an accumulating balance on which we are drawing to the extent of between £18,000 and £20,000 a year but by 1928 or 1929 that accumulated balance will have run out and then my right hon. Friend will be faced with the unpopular duty of approaching the Treasury with a request for special treatment for Scotland. His successful efforts in the past show that at least the Chancellor of the Exchequer has reason to believe that he is not the spineless invertebrate which hon. Members on the back benches opposite would have us believe him to be.

Mr. MAXTON: What were the successful efforts of the past? I have no recollection of them.

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member from time to time is led into heated interjections which lead to his suspension from the service of the House for a certain length of time, and I have no doubt that these things have transpired during his temporary absence.

Mr. MAXTON: Does the hon. and gallant Member suggest that there is any connection between the two occurrences?

Major ELLIOT: I would not go as far as that, but I would say that when the Secretary for Scotland is deprived of the necessity of arguing with the hon. Member he has more time to devote to arguing with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But I would refer to two occasions, one when we got a very large sum for the steel housing scheme, for which no equivalent was given to England.

Mr. MAXTON: The Prime Minister did that himself.

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member not being admitted to Cabinet secrets does
not know how much argument goes on behind the scenes. I would point further to the special grant of a quarter of a million given to the parish councils of Scotland for poor relief—given to the very local authorities in regard to which the hon. Member for Gorbals was complaining—and in regard to which no equivalent was given to the much larger and, in some cases, as heavily hit local authorities in England.

Mr. MAXTON: You did that yourself and you were hauled over the coals for it.

Mr. T. HENDERSON: Is it not the fact that the reason of the first grant was that there was a pledge given by the late Mr. Bonar Law to Lord Weir in regard to steel houses?

7.0 p.m.

Major ELLIOT: Not at all, and even if that had been so what about the second grant for the steel houses to be found in the current estimates. Though it is probable that we shall not be able to carry out the whole of that programme owing to the delays and other causes—including a lack of support—we had a steel house programme of 1,000 which will now be reduced to a programme of 500—Yet that Vote in its turn was given solely and entirely to Scotland without any equivalent being given to England. As to the difficulties the Highlands and Islands Fund, the reconstitution of the fund referred to in the report on that subject will be the occasion on which the right hon. Gentleman approaches the Treasury for the increase of the sum to be given for the medical benefits of the Highlands and Islands.
MY predecessor, the hon. Member for the St. Rollox Division (Mr. Stewart), devoted most of his speech to housing, with which I have dealt in my general remarks. While fully agreeing with him as to the high death rate in the more crowded areas, this aspect cannot be separated from the general aspect of the problem. You cannot take one item in the household and oudget say that that item is the salvation of the child or the housewife. The death rate is also co-related to the low rate of nourishment, which it itself one of the greatest problems that the sick person has. One finds in the case of the city represented
by the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston)—a most overcrowded city—that even there infantile mortality is actually lower than it is in Aberdeen, which is exceptionally good in housing amongst the Scottish towns.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman suggest that the worse the housing of a city is the healthier the people are?

Major ELLIOT: I would certainly not make any such foolish suggestion, but you cannot say that infantile mortality is co-related to one factor alone, namely, that of housing, for it is co-related to a number of factors, all of which have to be taken into consideration.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Has the hon. and gallant Gentleman got the figures of infantile mortality for the Blue Mountains?

Major ELLIOT: I was pointing out that the figures of mortality for Dundee, as a whole, are actually below those of Aberdeen as a whole, so that the figures for the Blue Mountains, however high they are, would actually injure his case instead of assisting it.

Mr. STEWART: The point I was trying to make was that with the housing conditions in the Rose Street district the rate was 235 per 1,000 of children born, and that the average for the city was 107 in that particular year, so that the rate in those districts remains practically steady. While I would not deny that poverty is a great factor, the fact remains that among people with a lower standard of life, as far as income is concerned, and who live in crowded houses, you find the standard of disease rate of every kind and the standard of mortality increase according to the badness of the housing, apart from other conditions.

Major ELLIOT: Naturally I do not wish to enter into too close an analysis—for this would not be the moment—of the bearing of respective factors on the disease rates of our city, but I would emphasise that there are other factors which have to be taken into consideration as well as housing factors, and I am sure the hon. Gentleman will give me his support to that extent. In connection
with the question of dwellers in slum houses, there is the question, which the hon. Member himself instanced, of being able to buy furniture and clean linen. That is in itself sufficient to show that the factor of cash-in-hand must influence the infestation of the population and consequently render them liable to certain forms of disease. The hon. Member also suggested we should take steps to deal with farmed-out houses, but the more one examines that problem the more difficult it seems to be to take action to deal with it. That is a matter which the hon. Gentleman also looked into when he was in my position, and he was unable to find any practical scheme for dealing with it, and I have not myself so far. I am afraid in these things the only solution is to get sufficient houses to allow a spreading out of the people. When you do that it is probable that the problem will begin to solve itself, but a mere series of Regulations is not really going to get us out of the hole in which we are at present. We have got far more regulations than we can apply. The difficulty in applying them is that we have nowhere for the people to go if we knock down the insanitary death traps in their districts. We cannot deal sufficiently with these things by regulations. As long as you have three tenants to one house, so long will you get difficulties in overcrowding. The people put up with those conditions because they do not like to complain or lodge information.
The hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) asked for the amount of money spent under the Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Act, and as to the advantage which has been taken of it. The figure given is £645,000, although, as my right hon. Friend said before, it would not be possible for him to give special reports on the number of dwellings because that would require inquiries from local authorities which he did not think would be justified in view of the many other duties imposed upon them. The hon. Member mentioned steel houses built in different parts of Scotland. All I have to say is that as far as I know they are giving full satisfaction. We have had no complaints whatever regarding these houses. We can, if desired, call for
special reports as to how they are standing the weather and how the tenants are getting on. I think we may take it that the tenant who is not satisfied with his house is generally quite ready to let the Government and the authorities know all about it.
Then the hon. Member referred to the Bo'ness fire. We have discussed at considerable length the question of this fire. It took place owing to a defective flue, and it might have taken place in any cottage. Reference has been made to the partition of asbestos, which though it might not take, fire, of course, might set light to inflammable material on the other side.

Mr. HARDIE: I should be glad to know whether anything has been done to prevent the use of the same materials and the same construction.

Major ELLIOT: We have certainly examined the houses in the light of the Bo'ness experience, which, as I said was due to a defective flue and grate. These things are being remedied and steps are being taken to see that they do not occur in future construction. With reference to the speech of the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs(Mr. Kirkwood). There is nothing I should enjoy better than a real good set-to with him in discussing all the great problems which he raised, but I must restrain myself for we are only two and the rest of the Committee would be getting weary while we had this discussion. I shall therefore postpone it to another time when, if we do not have every word that we say reported, we may be able to thrash things out and get down to the problems. The hon. Member indulged, and intentionally as he said, in generalities, and he will not blame if I do not reply to them on this particular occasion. As regards the number of houses asked for by him, I do not like to mention the number of houses built by the Government which he supported when in power because that would lead us again into controversy but I am willing to say that we provided last year three times as many houses as were provided by the previous Government, while we hope to do better than that this year.
One important point was raised by the hon. Member for Bothwell (Mr. Sullivan)
—the question of the pollution of rivers. A considerable grant has been made for investigation on that subject which is before a research committee. That subject is being taken over by the Lord President of the Council's Department, Lord Balfour himself, and that indicates that the Government thinks seriously on the matter, for I think he is the best man (I speak as a Scotsman), that the Government could get to consider the matter.
Lastly I come to the speech of the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) who devoted a considerable portion of his speech to a denunciation of certain income figures as being suitable or unsuitable for a man with a family. Let me point out that this concerns the question of the unemployment insurance scale. It still remains perfectly possible for local authorities to supplement the scale in case of need or in case of proved necessity. We have in Scotland that which does not exist in any other parts, namely, the right of a person receiving relief to sue the authority if the authority is not providing him with adequate means—and that right remains. This is a question of the scale of unemployment relief, and that is not a thing in regard to which any single party in this country can lodge accusations against another Government, because it is a matter which has been considered by successive Governments and by committees composed of people not all of one political temper. These committees and Governments have not taken the steps for increasing the relief which seemed to be suggested by the hon. Member.

Mr. BUCHANAN: The position is that many parishes, not in cases of proved necessity, but in the case of the general body of able-bodied unemployed, augment by a shilling or so up to 7s. or 8s. a week the maximum of the unemployment insurance. A circular was issued by the right hon. Gentleman recently, calling attention to the fact that the present insurance scale was sufficient and he practically refused borrowing powers to those who did not administer it and who came to borrow.

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member is now coming to the very point. The local authority which administers its own resources has a degree of latitude, but the local authority who comes to the
general body of taxpayers must, obviously, reconsider the matter. The local authority which has exhausted the whole of its own resources must be expected to consider the case when it is applying for additional money from the rest of the country. It is impossible for us to avoid the conclusion to which we are driven by the position with which the country is temporarily faced. The load of poor relief has been augmented by a sort of snowballing process in the last year or two, and, in these circumstances, it is not only right but it is the duty of the central administration to call the attention of the local authorities to the scales which have been laid down for the unemployment insurance scheme, and not by one Government only.

Mr. BUCHANAN: There was one thing which the late Government did not do, and that was to lower the scale of Poor Law relief. We are not discussing whether the unemployment insurance scale is sufficient or not. What our Government did not do was to reduce the Poor Law relief, which is what you are doing. Do you think 27s. is sufficient for two children and a man and a woman—to keep them and to pay the rent?

Major ELLIOT: It is not a question of the sufficiency of scales of income. They may be below the scale which we should all desire. The question is how far the economic resources of the community will go, and I have pointed out that committees and Governments have considered this scale and have laid down its amount. We all know that one can cross-examine as to what one thinks is a sufficient income, and we can all give figures of the income which we consider sufficient, but we have got to cut our coat according to our cloth and consider the, resources of the nation. If higher rates are allowed in the great shipbuilding parishes, then, unfortunately, unemployment will not be relieved but will be increased, and the very object we have instead of being relieved will be

accentuated. These are hard facts which must be taken into account, for the burden of the rates is one of the most important factors in the unemployment situation.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Why not kill them and save the rates entirely?

Major ELLIOT: It is impossible to enter into a discussion of every factor relating to our modern life in a debate on the Scottish Board of Health Vote. I have tried to deal with the specific questions which have been raised, and I have touched on one or two of the general questions which should be present to our minds when we discuss Scottish affairs.
Severe and desperate as the deep depression has been which has weighed on the country, so far the country has not merely weathered the storm from the health point of view, but it is actually making progress. It is healthier this year than last year, and it was healthier last year than the year before. We have been able not merely to hold our position but to improve it, and so long as that position is maintained it is one of hope and not of despair for Scotland, and one which should encourage us to do more than we have done, in the full realisation that our efforts have had good results, that we are not in a hopeless battle, but that the efforts which we are making are effecting real improvement in the state of our people. No better praise or approbation could be asked for by anyone responsible for the Government of the country.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move to reduce the Vote by £100.
I do so, owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the Government's reply on the many points raised.

Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £2,387,055, be granted for the said Service."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 96; Noes, 211.

Division No. 280.]
AYES
7.18 p.m


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Buchanan, G.
Dennison, R.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Charleton, H. C.
Duncan, C.


Ammon, Charles George
Clowes, S.
Dunnico, H.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Connolly, M.
Edge, Sir William


Baker, Walter
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Bondfield, Margaret
Dalton, Hugh
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Forrest, W.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Davies, Evan(Ebbw Vale)
Gardner, J. P.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Day, Colonel Harry
Garro-jones Captain G. M.


Gibbins, Joseph
Maxton, James
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Gillett, George M.
Montague, Frederick
Stamford, T. W.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Stephen, Campbell


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Mosley, Oswald
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Murnin, H.
Strauss, E. A.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Paling, W.
Sullivan, Joseph


Groves, T.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Sutton, J. E.


Grundy, T. W.
Potts, John S.
Taylor, R. A.


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Riley, Ben
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Hardie, George D.
Ritson, J.
Thurtle, Ernest


Hayes, John Henry
Robinson, W.C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)
Tinker, John Joseph


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Viant, S. P.


Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Scurr, John
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Kelly, W. T.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Wellock, Wilfred


Kennedy, T.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Welsh, J. C.


Kirkwood, D.
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John
Westwood, J.


Lansbury, George
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Lawrence, Susan
Sitch, Charles H.
Windsor, Walter


Lee, F.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Lindley, F. W.
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)



Lunn, William
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Snell, Harry
Mr-T. Henderson and Mr. Whiteley.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut-Colonel
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Dawson, Sir Philip
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Albery, Irving James
Dixey, A. C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Long, Major Eric


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Lougher, Lewis


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Elveden, Viscount
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s-M.)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Atholl, Duchess of
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Maclntyre, Ian


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
McLean, Major A.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Fielden, E. B.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Macquisten, F. A.


Bethel, A.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Malone, Major P. B.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Fraser, Captain Ian
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Margesson, Captain D.


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Mason, Lieut,-Col. Glyn K.


Briscoe, Richard George
Grace, John
Meller, R. J.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Grant, Sir J. A.
Merriman, F. B.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Meyer, Sir Frank


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Brown, Col. D. C.(N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hammersley, S. S.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Buchan, John
Hanbury, C.
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Moreing, Captain A. H.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Harland, A.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Harrison, G. J. C.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Caine, Gordon Hall
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Campbell, E. T.
Hawke, John Anthony
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Cassels, J. D.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)
Nicholson. Col. Rt. Hn.W.G. (Ptrsf'ld.)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Nuttall, Ellis


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox, Univ.)
Hills, Major John Waller
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hilton, Cecil
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.SirJ.A.(Birm.,W.)
Hong, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Penny, Frederick George


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Holt, Captain H. P.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Perring, Sir William George


Clayton, G. C.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Horlick, Lieut.-Cotonel J. N.
Radford, E. A.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Colonel C. K.
Raine, Sir Walter


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Ramsden, E.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Hume, Sir G. H.
Remer, J. R.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Huntingfield, Lord
Remnant, Sir James


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hurd, Percy A.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Couper, J. B.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Craig, Sir Ernest(Chester, Crewe)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Rye, F. G.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jephcott, A. R.
Salmon, Major I.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Himpst'd)
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Sanderson, Sir Frank




Sandon, Lord
Styles, Captain H. W.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Wells, S. R.


Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ.,Belfst)
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Smith, R. W. (aberd'n & Ktnc'dine,C.)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Smithers, Waldron
Tinne, J. A.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Wise, Sir Fredric


Sprot, Sir Alexander
Turton, sir Edmund Russborough
Withers, John James


Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Waddington, R.
Wolmer, Viscount


Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Wallace. Captain D. E.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Ward, Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)
Wragg, Herbert


Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.



Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Major Cope and Mr. F. C. Thomson.


Original Question put, and agreed to.

CLASS III.

PRISONS, SCOTLAND.

Motion made, and Question proposed.
That a sum, not exceeding £86,153, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1928, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland, and of the Prisons under their control, including the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics. Defectives, and Inmates of the State Inebriate Reformatory, the Preparation of Judicial Statistics, and a Grant for certain Expenses connected with Discharged Prisoners."—[Note: £65,000 has been voted on account.]

Mr. MAXTON: This Vote is not often discussed in this House, but the fact that we had some new legislation on the subject during last Session brought the matter before our attention, and that justifies us now in spending some part of the Committee's time in looking at this particular branch of public administration. The first point upon which I desire information is as to the exact changes that have taken place in the distribution of the prison population as a result of the Prisons (Scotland) Act, 1926. While that Act was passing through the House I expressed certain fears as to its possible effect. I was very doubtful of the wisdom of allowing men to be detained in local legalised police cells for a period of 30 days. I would like to know how many of these police Cells have been legalised under the new Act and how many prisoners have been detained in legalised police cells who would before the passing of the Act have been sent to ordinary prisons. I should like to know, also, if the right hon. Gentleman can give me any idea whether or not the new system is working well. I was glad to see in one part of the Report of the Scottish Prison Commissioners that one prisoner had escaped
from a legalised police cell. That was a gratifying feature, and if it became general a very large part of my objection would be removed; but the fact that there has only been one shows that there is only a small improvement on the ordinary prison system.
I should like to call attention to some statistics. Of all the prisoners in Scotland during the year 1926, 15,000 in all, there were only 93 who were sentenced for more than one year, and a very large proportion, more than 14,000 of the total 15,000, were sentenced to periods of three months or less. Almost half of the prisoners in Scotland were serving sentences of 14 days and under. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it is not worth while sending a man to prison for 14 days. A man who is only worthy of a sentence of 14 days is not a criminal in the real sense of the term. He is not a real menace to society. Society is not in any serious danger, and it seems to me a waste of public money and a waste of men to make them gaolbirds for a sentence of 14 days, and I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he could use his influence, or if his colleague the Lord Advocate could use his perhaps greater influence in these matters, so as to see that magistrates throughout the country do not sentence men to imprisonment when really they should be put on probation, or if he would see that the magistrates throughout the country where they are inflicting a fine with the alternative of imprisonment, should give very long periods and easy instalments for the paying up of the necessary fine.
Even supposing he did not get the fine in the long run, I think it would be an economy and in the interests of public decency to lose the 10s. fine rather than to keep that man in prison for 14 days. The Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) showed that it cost something approaching
£2 a week to keep a man in Peterhead convict prison, and that it costs almost as much, 30s. a week, to keep a man in an ordinary prison. It is poor national economy to put a man in gaol at the expense to the community of a couple of pounds because he is too poor to pay a fine of 10s. or £1. If the right hon. Gentleman cannot extend to a very large extent the use of the probation system to keep men out of prison, and to keep them clear of other penalties except the penalty of probation and being looked after, which is an objectionable thing in itself—if he cannot see his way to put a large number of these short-term people on probation, let him at least arrange with the magistrates that the longest possible time be given for the payment of instalments. By that way, I think, we could reduce the Scottish prison population to one-half of what it is to-day.
I want to congratulate the Scottish Office on this report, as I did yesterday on the Scottish Fishery Report, and on the skill with which the reports are prepared and edited. It would be a very liberal education for the majority of Scotsmen if they read nothing else in the course of a year than the reports of the Board of Health, the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, and similar reports. They would know from these exactly how Scotland was working and was being administered. In this very valuable Report, we have at the end included many other things, short accounts of the life and the record of persons in various prisons. To me the description of the men or the women and the reasons why they were put in prison seems to stress the point I am trying to make that a very large proportion of the people who go to prison should never be there at all. Here is a person whose age is 55. That is too late to begin a successful life of crime. If you are not through your apprenticeship and a good journeyman before middle-age, you should not start at all. This man's offence is unlawfully lodging in a lavatory. Sentence, 10s. or five days. Was once fined for drunkenness. He was a Presbyterian, and attended Church regularly. He had a good upbringing, home comfortable, and parents kind, and he goes and sleeps in a lavatory when 55, and is branded as a criminal He is a church member and a churchgoer.
Working regularly in the pits, until 12 years ago, when he had an illness which incapacitated him and he was forbidden to work in a mine. Casual labour sine. Widower; wife died five years ago. Three children, all doing well. Never in prison until the day he committed this heinous offence of sleeping in a lavatory. He does not drink to any extent, and was never in trouble until his illness. Good intelligence. Not fit for anything but light sedentary work, which is difficult to obtain. Looks much older than his years.
I want to ask if public money should be spent in keeping a man like that in gaol? Is he a criminal? Possibly he is more a criminal now that he has done his five days than before. He is certainly marked as a gaol-bird among the people with whom he was in the habit of formerly associating, and his opportunity of securing a steady place in society has declined so much the less. There is another case which, if hon. Members will bear with me, I think I will be able to find. I can remember the details of the case sufficiently. Here is the case. It is the case of a woman who had been unemployed for a very considerable time. Age 28. Offence, fraud on the Ministry of Labour. I am glad my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary is here. Sentence, 14 days without the option of a fine. First offender. Then come some particulars about her parents which do not really matter. Went to church, Sunday school and Bible-class until 14. Was employed as a hair-spinner for 16 years. Married. Husband a miner not very good to her. No children. Husband deserted her. Went back to work after desertion, and was steadily employed until the coal dispute. Opened a small restaurant when thrown out of work and continued to draw unemployment benefit, though not entitled to do so. Never touches drink. Quite well-behaved woman who should not again commit an offence. I think it is positively disgraceful that the Ministry of Labour should have brought her into Court, and that a penalty of imprisonment should have been given without the option of a fine, and that we, the community, should turn her out into the streets branded as a gaol-bird.
I have one case very similar—a constituent of my own. I must admit at once that the right hon. Gentleman the
Minister of Labour, when the facts were fully presented to him, made arrangements whereby the amount for which the Ministry had been defrauded should be paid back. The man has continued his work and established himself as a very good citizen. This case is a similar one. There were 1,000,000 people unemployed. A man or a woman that has tried every available ordinary agency for employment has decided to start in some little business or other. They do not know whether they will have a wage in that business at the end of the week, or whether they are going to lose money out of it, and they carry it on for five or six weeks, and, very naturally, they are trying to back it both ways, and to see whether the business is going to prove a success or not. They carry on their business and draw insurance pay at the same time, but the Ministry of Labour says that is an attempt to defraud them, and here you have this woman of 28 years of age kept in prison for 14 days, because she has shown a keen desire to maintain herself instead of drawing unemployment benefit, only she wants to draw unemployment benefit until she sees whether her venture is going to be successful. You are backing it in many ways.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. James Hope): I am not backing it any way.

Mr. MAXTON: I want the right hon. Gentleman in his reply to give some assurance that as far as his influence is concerned he will try to prevent people of that sort being put into prison, or kept in prison. I know the limits of his jurisdiction. I know there are magistrates who must be allowed, if their office is to be maintained with any dignity, a fair degree of latitude in the sentences they give and the manner in which they commit people, but I know also the Lord Advocate is the head of our legal machinery, and the Secretary of State is the head of our general administration, and that they have a tremendous influence which, if used in this direction, can abolish a large proportion of our prison population.
One other point I want to bring forward. In the Vote there is a certain amount of money which is voted to pay prisoners a sort of gratuity when discharged from prison. The total amount is not very great, I regret to say, but there is a system in prison whereby a
good-conduct prisoner who performs his prison tasks adequately and fully each day is allowed so many marks, and in proportion to the amount of marks he has earned in the course of his sentence he receives a gratuity from the Commissioners on his discharge from prison. The amount for 1926—it is on page 88 of this Book, under the heading "R"—is £1,650. That is an increase of £50 over 1925. I do not know how far the Minister is bound by the existing law as to the restriction of the amount that shall be paid to a prisoner in the nature of a gratuity, but, if my recollection is correct, the amount is a penny for every 12 marks earned, and it takes a day and a half to earn 12 marks, so that it two days the prisoner gets about 1½d., provided that the work has been well done and that his conduct has been perfect. That is three farthings a day, and at the end of 30 days a prisoner, who has served that sentence, gets 90 farthings, which is something in the nature of two shillings. I know a prisoner who worked hard, and at the end of the year had something like 19 shillings, after doing all the work and earning all his marks. He had that as a gratuity when he was discharged, and had to face the world once more.
I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman if there is anything that compels him to limit the gratuity to that absolutely futile level? I say futile, in the sense that it is not sufficient to be of any use to a man when he returns into ordinary civil life and into his usual surroundings. It would not be a tremendous addition to the total Prison Vote if this sum of £1,650 were increased to something like £5,000 or £6,000, and the amount that each prisoner would receive on being discharged would be an appreciable amount that would be of some service in providing him with his first meal and his first night's lodging after coming out of prison. These are points that I wish to raise, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to satisfy me that the matter of the legalised police cells, as extended by the recent Act, is working well, and that in those places where he has legalised police cells the prisoners concerned are all receiving the normal conditions in the way of exercise, recreation, library, medical attendance, and the services of a chaplain, that they would receive if they
were confined in one of the ordinary prisons or in one of the convict settlements.

Mr. E. BROWN: I would like to reinforce what the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) has said about the short sentence. I want to point out to the Committee that this has special reference to juveniles, for there is one very tragic fact about the total of the juveniles. It appears from the Report that last year 1,293 juveniles were committed to prison, and of those 680 were committed without the option of a fine. It does seem to me that we might have a little more light on the passage in the Report which bears upon this, because it is obvious that those who drafted this very admirable Report had this point in mind. The Report says:
It will be observed that more than half (680) were committed to prison without the option of a fine. Doubtless the great majority had been previously dealt with in some way or another, but the Commissioners repeat their recommendations in last year's report that Section 42 (2) (c) of the Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914, should be taken advantage of in Scotland. If this were done and proper supervision by probation officers provided, it is improbable that imprisonment would be necessary in a considerable number of those cases sentenced with option of a fine. This whole question has been under the consideration of the Departmental Committee appointed by the Secretary of State for Scotland of which the Chairman of the Prison Commission is a member. Evidence has been given before that Committee by several governors and others on behalf of the Prison Commissioners whose work has brought them into close contact with this problem. It is very desirable that every expedient be tried before commiting a young person to prison, even if a more severe sentence of imprisonment results as a last resort when other expedients have failed; it is more likely to be effective than repeated short sentences.
I should like to hear from the Secretary of State What his opinion is about that observation, because it is so essential to give these juveniles their chance, and the fact that 680 children or young people should have been sentenced without the option of a fine does seem to call for some comment from this House. There is one tragic fact about the figures of this year. For the years from 1923 to 1925 there has been a progressive decline in the total figures. Even now they are very striking, and point to the law-abiding nature of the whole Scottish
nation. Out of a population, reaching this year to nearly 5,000,000, the total is 17,690—a very remarkable tribute to the law-abiding nature of the people of Scotland. This figure of 17,690 compares with 15,802 for 1925, and this increase is almost entirely due to the effect of the great dispute and to the convictions consequent upon the dispute in 1926. I notice there were 661 cases due to the coal trouble. I would ask the Secretary for Scotland if any of these cases are still in prison, or if by this time they have completed their sentences. I also want to ask this question. I notice that there is only one preventive institution for male criminals at Peterhead. I would like to know if there is any classification in the three classes, as I think there ought to be, between the habitual criminal, the redeemables and those who may have committed a serious crime, but in whose case it was their first offence. I think we ought, in the administration of the law, to do justice to the ideal of mercy as well as to the ideal of justice, and without at all trying to pamper the prisoners, to give a chance of redemption to every man for whom redemption is possible. I would call attention to the matter of unemployment. There are a number of people now in very grave concern through unemployment, in particular necessitous areas in Scotland. On page 91 of the Report there is this case:
Age 27 Offence—drawing relief when employed. Sentence 30 days. One previous conviction for loitering in street. Father a hole-borer. English. Mother Irish. Prisoner born in Scotland. Father once in prison for assault on wife. Separated for 10 years. Both alive. Mother respectable; never in prison. Father was a Protestant, but adopted wife's religion, Roman Catholic, on marriage. Father never goes to chapel. Mother goes regularly Prisoner is of fair education. Attended Sunday school until 14 and has always gone to chapel. Riveter by trade. Had been employed fairly regularly until 18 months ago. Has had unemployment benefit and parish relief. Was working and drawing relief—hence conviction. Married; wife respectable; two children. Neither wife nor he touches drink. Anxious to get regular work but cannot. Active and intelligent.
That does seem to me a case which calls for attention from the Committee. Thirty days for that conviction does seem excessive, and I should like to know whether cases of that kind, when they come out of gaol, are regularly followed up, so that a man of that kind may be
given a chance, instead of being stamped with the terrible title of gaol-bird. There is no question whatever that is very hard indeed for men who have exceeded their benefit under the Unemployment Acts, and who are not drawing parish relief sufficient to keep them, to resist temptations of that kind.
In regard to what the hon. Member for Bridgeton said about the question of short sentences, I would say that the need for these is shown by the splendid work adopted in some cases in regard to the juveniles. I note with great pleasure the course of special lectures given in one institution. There is not time to go into details, although, as a matter of fact, those who take the trouble to read this report will find it of very great interest. But with regard to short sentences, it does seem that these opportunities are only too fleeting for those who are condemned to those institutions, and that where the offence is such that a short sentence is suitable, there should be some alternative way of dealing with these first offenders.

Mr. W. ADAMSON: In addition to the verve interesting general points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgeton regarding the question of prison administration, as well as the points raised by the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown), there is one class of person I would like to bring before the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland before he rises to reply to the points that have been already put to him. The class of prisoner to which I want to draw his attention are the men who are in prison due to the occurrences which happened in the course of the coal stoppage of last year. Those men are not in prison for the ordinary criminal offences. They are there because they acted on the spur of the moment during the course of the stoppage, when, as everyone knows very well, feelings run high and acts are sometimes committed which men would not commit in their calmer moments. They are in prison, in some cases for very substantial periods. I have already taken an opportunity of bringing before the Secretary of State and the Permanent Under-Secretary of his Department a number of cases such as I have been outlining. I have two lists of them before me as I speak. One of them is a case of 18 men who were
imprisoned on the 25th March last for taking part in a riot that occurred at Bowhill Colliery. They were sentenced at the Sheriff Court at Dunfermline, and their sentences ranged from two months to eight months. Most of the men were sentenced for periods ranging from two to four months, and, as the Lord Advocate has already pointed out, there are a number of them whose sentences have expired, and, as far as my information goes, only seven of the men sentenced to eight months, six months and four months remain in prison.

8.0 p.m.

The CHAIRMAN: I am not quite clear what the right hon. Gentleman means. If he is arguing that these men should have special facilities and that they should not be treated like ordinary criminals, I think that would be in order on this Vote. But, if he is asking that the sentences should be remitted, that would not be in order.

Mr. MAXTON: On that point of Order. In the Report of the Prison Commissioners, which I understand is under discussion, quite legitimately, on this particular Vote, reference is definitely made to the effect of the coal stoppage in increasing the number in the Scottish prisons this year as compared with last year. In view of that fact, I would respectfully submit that the question of whether they should continue to remain in prison or be released is quite a fit subject for discussion on this particular Vote.

The CHAIRMAN: It is not so much a question of how they came to be there as to how they are to be treated when they are there. It would be perfectly in order to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland or the Lord Advocate that they should have better treatment as what is called "first-class misdemeanants" or something of that sort. But I do not think it would be possible to go into the question of the total remission of their sentences. That perhaps might be done on the Law Vote or on the Vote for the salary of the Lord Advocate. If I allowed a discussion of this sort on this Vote, it would only be another step to the discussion of the justice of the sentences.

Mr. ADAMSON: I looked up all the Votes before I rose to take part in the discussion and I looked to see on which
Vote it would be better for me to raise the matter that I wanted to raise, and, as there were more aspects of the case than the one that you have mentioned that I wanted to be able to put to the Secretary of State for Scotland, I thought it would be better to do it on this Vote and while I was doing it to put the whole of the points that I wanted to put to him and finish with them rather than divide my questions on two Votes. The point that I wanted to put to the Secretary of State for Scotland was that I thought that in these types of cases the ends of justice would be met by smaller sentences than have been passed in the particular list that I have before me.

The CHAIRMAN: I am afraid that would be opening a very wide door for discussion about criminal justice altogether. It would be in order on the Vote for Law and Justice or perhaps on the Vote for the Lord Advocate's salary, but I think the Prison Commissioners have no jurisdiction whatsoever as to sentences. Their jurisdiction is only as to the treatment of prisoners who are in gaol.

Mr. WILLIAM GRAHAM: May I, on that point of Order, with great respect, suggest that, unless I am wrong, when a person is convicted he passes from the jurisdiction of the Lord Advocate altogether and the problem is one entirely for the Secretary of State for Scotland, or very largely for the Secretary of State for Scotland. I understand that these are convicted prisoners and the only suggestion I rise with respect to offer is that, if by an agreement among ourselves, we were to have a discussion upon this it would be very much easier than to confine the problem to the Report of the Scottish Prison Commissioners and try to leave the rest to the discussion on the Vote for the salary of the Secretary of State for Scotland. I think a division of that kind would be very difficult and, accordingly, the proposal I would respectfully submit is that we might by agreement take these matters in the form which my right hon. Friend proposes to take them as the only way in which we can properly discuss these problems tonight.

The LORD ADVOCATE: May I point out that the question of the remission or reduction of these sentences is a matter for the Royal clemency and is not one which can be raised here, although it lies within the power of my right hon. Friend to advise as to its exercise.

Mr. MAXTON: Further on the point of Order. There is a definite paragraph in the Report here which says that the total number of prisoners received for offences arising out of the coal dispute is 661. Of these, 377 were re-admitted to prison after conviction. That is increasing the bill for the number for the whole year to the extent of 73. While it is true that it would not be within the scope of this discussion to suggest that the Royal prerogative should be used in any one or all of these cases, it is within the province of my right hon. Friend to argue that, if these people were not detained in prison, the expenses of the Scottish prison administration would be considerably less.

The CHAIRMAN: I think, if I were once to admit a discussion on that point. it would be opening a very wide vista of possibilities. I am afraid I must adhere to my ruling, but, if there be serious interest taken in this matter, if hon. Members will consult me as to which Vote it can be raised on, perhaps it might be possible to find time for it next week. I am pretty clear that it cannot come on the question of the advice that might be given to His Majesty. It cannot be raised here. If that were discussed in Committee of Supply at all, it could not come under the Vote for Prison Commissioners.

Mr. ADAMSON: If that be your ruling, Mr. Hope, I will, of course, respectfully bow to it. I had thought that this Vote would have afforded an opportunity for the discussion of this matter. I can assure you that it world not have taken me a very great length of time to have discussed all the points I wish to put forward.

The CHAIRMAN: I am quite sure that the right hon. Gentleman is the last person who would wish to offend against the Rules of Order, but, all the same, I have to think of precedents and of the Rules of the House. Possibly the House may regard them as too severe, but so long as they exist I am afraid I must enforce them.

Mr. ADAMSON: If I am not to be permitted to finish my points on this Vote, I shall have to defer the discussion until some other suitable occasion.

Sir J. GILMOUR: The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) who opened the Debate on this subject asked me if I would inform him what the effect of legalised cells had been, and he was anxious to know how far the circumstances under which those cells were operated were to the benefit of the inmates. So far as we have dealt with this problem since the passage of the 1926 Act, only one place has been scheduled as legalised cells for sentences of 30 days. That was at Stornoway. That, as the hon. Member is aware, is an area remotely removed from the ordinary circumstances. In addition to that, I would add that, of course, the actual cells are in the old prison so that, in effect, the circumstances are absolutely similar to those we had existing in that area, and in practice it is really only legalising the use of past prisons which had been vacated. In those circumstances, I think he may be satisfied that this problem is being dealt with carefully. I would only add that it is not the intention of myself or, indeed, of my Office that this should be extended broadcast. It can only be done with the greatest care.
Comment was made upon the fact that there were a certain number of short sentences, and objection was raised to certain individuals being sent to prison for short periods. I do not know what real alternative there is to offer for a correction which, while it may have its difficulties, is, in the main, at any rate, so far as we have been able to see, the only possible method of dealing with certain classes of crime. Reference has been made, of course, to the possibility of extending probation. I am in favour of probation if I could find a satisfactory method of carrying it out, but all I can say to-day is that we have got a committee sitting at present considering the problem, particularly of young offenders, and until we have in our hands that Report and any recommendation which the committee may make, it would be premature to ask us to make any declaration.

Mr. E. BROWN: Is the work of that committee approaching a finish?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Yes, I think it is approaching a finish, but, if the hon. Gentleman will put down a question on that matter, I will endeavour to ascertain the facts. It is, however, clear that these matters are being given careful consideration. In addition to that, I have, so far as it has been possible, endeavoured to extend that system. It was a system in which my right hon. Friend who was previously upon the Front Bench and previously in the Scottish Office took a considerable interest. The real problem and difficulty, as I see it, is to find suitable probation officers and to get those in the locality, responsible people, to take a real and active interest in these young people. It is not really sufficient to make a nominal supervision, because by that means they slide back into the same courses. In those circumstances, it is a matter of considerable difficulty to find suitable supervision, and effective supervision which will really deter and in many cases assist in the re-establishment of people who have fallen into crime.
With regard to the actual conduct of these prisons, I think that we are making some progress. The hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown) asked me some questions about Peterhead. Peterhead is, as hon. Members know, a penal prison, and only those go to that prison who are sentenced to penal servitude. Even there we are making what one might describe as very humane experiments, in so far as giving greater latitude for conversation and meals is concerned, and we are endeavouring, by every means in our power, while carrying out properly and fairly the restrictive measures which are necessary, to build up and strengthen the character of these men, so that when they come out again they may have a better chance. Reference has been made to the amount of the gratuity which may be earned by earned by good marks. It may seem that the amounts which can be earned are small in themselves, but, while I am quite willing to investigate that point, what is far more essential and practical, in my view, than increasing to any great amount the money which the individual has in his hands when he goes, is to see if it is possible, by co-operation with
outside bodies—and this is work in which I know the Prison Commissioners are taking an active interest—to find jobs and places for these people when they come out into the outer world.

Mr. MAXTON: I was not suggesting for a moment that an increased gratuity should be an alternative to care; I was suggesting it as something additional.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I do not think that any scheme of that kind which could be devised would materially assist these individuals, and, if the gratuity were increased to a considerable sum, it might even have a very detrimental effect. The fact of a man being launched out with money in his hands after he has been for a long perīod denied it, is just the kind of thing which often leads to his renewed downfall rather than to his improvement.

Mr. MAXTON: I am very keen about this problem, and the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that, in any case in which the Prison Commissioners are in doubt as to the capacity of the prisoner to use his 5s. properly and economically, it is paid to him through the Prisoners' Aid Society in smaller instalments, so that the point which the right hon. Gentleman is making does not really arise. Surely, the prospect that a man would have sufficient to pay for his lunch and bed on the first night when he comes out is not going to encourage people to be lawbreakers.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I am quite willing to consider the suggestion, the hon. Member's interest in which I realize; but, as I have said, I think that a far more practical method of dealing with these individuals would be on the lines I have suggested.

Mr. LEE: Would the right hon. Gentleman say what efforts are being made to find these men work?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The Prison Commissioners are in close touch with the Prisoners' Aid Society and a variety of other societies, and they take every means in their power to help these men and women when they come out of restraint. Of course, one is painfully aware of the difficulties, particularly in dealing with the younger people who come under the law, but we are making
increased endeavours, not only to interest them in work while they are under restraint, but to train them in work which will be of value and interest to them when they come out into the outer world. While we may in Scotland admittedly lag behind England with regard to the problem of probation, yet, as I have indicated, it is a problem which we are investigating, and in regard to which I hope we may make progress. On the other hand, I think we can justly claim that the prison administration, and particularly the new prison at Edinburgh, is a great advance on anything that we have seen in the prison world in the past. It is with an earnest endeavour to see the law carried out and properly administered, but at the same time to make these men useful while they are under restraint and to give them an opportunity of facing the world again, that the Prison Commissioners are carrying out at the present time what I believe to be a progressive policy. Reference has been made to lectures which are given. That is a matter which I think can be progressively pursued. The choice of subjects and the class of teacher employed, particularly in helping the boys and young men, are matters of the greatest importance. In that we are taking an increasing and, I hope, progressive interest, and I trust that it will be found that, while we still have a regrettably large number in our prisons, yet we are on a hopeful course of decrease and, at the same time, of more humane methods.

Mr. E. BROWN: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us anything about the men who were committed during the coal dispute? I think there were 661. Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many are still in prison?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I think the number actually in prison at the present time is 21.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider those 21 cases, and, now that all the bitterness has died down, release them?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I cannot discuss that matter across the Floor of the House.

Mr. MAXTON: I beg to move to reduce the Vote by £100.
I move this reduction on the ground that the Prisons Estimate for Scotland is unduly large, owing to the unnecessary incarceration of certain miners because of matters arising out of the coal dispute.

Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £86,053, be granted for the said Service."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 78; Noes, 165.

Division No. 281.]
AYES.
[8.24 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Grundy, T. W.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Ammon, Charles George
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hardie, George D.
Sitch, Charles H.


Baker, Walter
Hayes, John Henry
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bondfield, Margaret
Johnston, Thomas(Dundee)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Kirkwood, D.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Buchanan, G.
Lansbury, George
Sullivan, Joseph


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Lawrence, Susan
Sutton, J E.


Charleton, H. C.
Lee, F.
Taylor, R. A.


Clowes, S.
Lindley, F. W.
Thurtle, Ernest


Compton, Joseph
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Tinker, John Joseph


Connolly, M.
Maxton, James
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Duncan, C.
Murnin, H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Dunnico, H.
Paling, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Westwood, J.


Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Riley, Ben
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Forrest, W.
Ritson, J.
Windsor, Walter


Gardner, J. P.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Young, Robert(Lancaster, Newton)


Gibbins, Joseph
Rose, Frank H.



Gillett, George M.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Graham, D, M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Scurr, John
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr.




Whiteley.


NOES.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Davies, Sir Thomas(Cirencester)
King, Commodore Henry Douglas


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Knox, Sir Alfred


Albery, Irving James
Dawson, Sir Philip
Lamb, J. Q.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Dixey, A. C.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.


Alexander, sir Wm, (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Allen, J. Sandeman(L'pool, W. Derby)
Eillot, Major Walter E.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Elveden, Viscount
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Long, Major Eric


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Looker, Herbert William


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Fielden, E. B.
Lougher, Lewis


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Finburgh, S.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Bethel, A.
Ford, Sir P. J.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Betterton, Henry B.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Maclntyre, Ian


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
McNeill Rt. Hon. Ronald John


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Grenfell, Edward C.(City of London)
Macquisten, F. A.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Buchan, John
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Hanbury, C.
Margesson, captain D.


Burman, J. B.
Harland, A.
Meller, R. J.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Merriman, F. B.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hawke, John Anthony
Meyer, Sir Frank


Campbell, E. T.
Henderson, Lt.-Col. Sir V. L. (Bootle)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)


Cassels, J. D.
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Murchison, sir Kenneth


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph


Clayton, G. C.
Hills, Major John Waller
Nelson, Sir Frank


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hilton, Cecil
Newman, sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Holt, Captain H. P.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Colfox, Major William Phillips
Horlick, Lieut-Colonel J. N.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Howard-Bury, Lieut-Colonel C. K.
Perkins, Colonel E. K.


Couper, J. B.
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Perring, Sir William George


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Huntingfield, Lord
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry(Islington, N.)
Hurd, Percy A.
Preston, William


Craig, Sir Ernest(Chester, Crewe)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Radford, E. A.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Raine, Sir Walter


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Ramsden, E.


Cunliffe, Sir Herbert
Jephcott, A. R.
Remer, J. R.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Rice, Sir Frederick


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Kidd, J. (Linilthgow)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)


Ropner, Major L.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'oland)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Rye, F. G.
Streatfeild, Captain S. R.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Salmon, Major I.
Styles, Captain H. W.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Sandeman, N. Stewart
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Wells, S. R.


Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Thom, Lt.-Col. J. G. (Dumbarton)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Thompson, Luke(Sunderland)
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Shepperson, E. W.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Llchfield)


Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-
Windsor-Clive, Lieut. -Colonel George


Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)
Tinne, J. A.
Wise, Sir fredric


Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Withers, John James


Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dlne, C.)
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough



Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Waddington, R.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Wallace, Captain D. E.
Major Cope and Mr. Penny


Bill read a Second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House for To-morrow.—[Mr. McNeill.]

CLASS IV.

PUBLIC EDUCATION, SCOTLAND.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £3,833,029, be granted to His Majesty to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March,1928, for Public Education in Scotland, and for the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh, including a Grant-in-Aid."—[Note: £2,750,000 has been voted on account.]

Mr. WESTWOOD: I want to express my very great disappointment that, despite all the deputations that have met the Secretary of State and all the conferences that have been held, we have not yet been able to influence the Scottish Office in the way of trying to help us out of the difficulty we are faced with. I put a question to the Secretary of State asking for a return as to the total expenditure of local authorities in the mining areas in normal times in the feeding and clothing of necessitous children and the expenditure incurred between 16th May and 31st December, 1926, and the return I received was rather an amazing one. The normal expenditure of these six education authorities who were affected by the expenditure made necessary for the feeding of children because of the mining dispute of 1926—Ayr, Lanark, East Lothian, Midlothian, Stirling, Fife and Clackrnannan—from 16th May, 1925, to 15th May, 1926, only totalled £10,655, but from 16th May to 31st December, 1926, the expenditure incurred by these authorities totalled no less a sum than £141,933. The two authorities I am particularly interested in so far as this expenditure is concerned, Midlothian and Fife, of whose education authority I am still a member, have had a very great expenditure in connection with the feeding of children. Midlothian had an expenditure of £13,914, compared with an
expenditure in 1925–6 of only £165; and my own authority of Fife had an expenditure of approximately £76,000 to £79,000. It is with the greatest disappointment that I have to say that we have not been able to influence the Secretary of State or the Department in making some special grant. Not that we have ever desired to change in any way the arrangement whereby the Scottish Education Fund is distributed to the various education authorities, but we were up against exceptional circumstances in 1926–27, and again I want to express my very great disappointment that. despite the abnormal circumstances, despite the very heavy burden these education authorities have had to bear, we have had no help from the Government.
Speaking for my own authority, we only carried out the law. We were compelled to incur this expenditure because the parish councils themselves had refused to accept what I believe were very good instructions so far as the Under-Secretary is concerned. I have no complaint to make in connection with that. They advised the parish councils to do something that they believed was right at that time in the interests of ordinary humanity. The parish councils in many instances absolutely refused to accept these instructions, because they maintained that it was illegal to make the payments. What they maintained was proved to be right in the Courts of this land. Certain payments were made through another fund to this parish council which broke the law at that particular time. As I have said on a previous occasion, it seems to be rather a strange position that, with a Conservative Government in power, you reward those who break the law and you refuse to do anything for those who really keep and maintain the law. I shall leave that question now, as I know that some other hon. Members will deal with the hardships in respect to particular areas.
There are certain questions on education that I desire to put to the Secretary for Scotland. There is the question which I put during the year as to what action the Department were taking for the purpose of submitting to the education authorities—the Department themselves finally approving of it—a scheme of scale of salaries for the headmasters and teachers in our secondary schools. This is a question which is exercising the minds of education authorities and the secondary headmasters and secondary teachers. Very bitter criticism, I think, was levelled against the Departments by the Court that tried a particular case known as Smart v. Perthshire Education Authority. I think that that criticism was not altogether justified, but I anticipated as a result of that criticism that long before this we should have had a definite scheme of scale of salaries in its application to the secondary headmasters and secondary teachers in our schools in Scotland. I should like to know what is being done in that direction, and what mutual arrangement has been come to between the respective education authorities as far as the payments of secondary headmasters and secondary teachers is concerned.
In the very interesting report issued by the Education Department, I find, on page 27, a reference to the exchange of teachers between this country and the Colonies and the Dominions. That is a question which ought to exercise the minds of the education authorities more than it is doing at the present time. Most powerful work can be done from the educational point of view and from the Empire point of view in the exchange of Scottish teachers for teachers in the Dominions and in the Colonies. Only a very brief reference is made to what, I believe, is an interesting experiment, and one which will ultimately be of great good from the educational point of view. On page 27 of the Report of the Committee of the Council of Education in Scotland are these words:
The temporary exchanges of posts between teachers in Scotland and teachers in the Dominions which are arranged under the scheme launched by the Imperial Education Conference of 1923 appear to be increasing in number. During the year under revision 17 exchanges were reported to the Department.
I want to make a special appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland and to
the Education Department to encourage the education authorities in Scotland, in so far as they possibly can, to make the necessary arrangements for the maximum number of exchanges, so that we can get the benefit of these Colonial teachers, and so that our Colonies and Dominions can get the benefit of the teachers who are trained and who are teaching in our country at the present time.
The next question I want to raise is one which has been exercising the mind of the Executive and of the education authorities in particular. Under a very old Act of Parliament—of 1883, I think—Section 11 (b), no parent is really compelled to send a child to school or under obligation to provide education for the child if the child is outside a three-miles limit of a publicly-controlled school. The Dumbartonshire Education Authority, who were actually prepared to pay the travelling expenses of a child who was outside the three-miles limit, had to contend with the obstinacy of the parent, who, obviously, was trying to make a claim that they should build a school at his particular door instead of making arrangements to convey his child to the school door. The Sheriff in the Dumbartonshire Court was satisfied, as the Act said, that the parent had the right to refuse to send his child to school because he was outside the three-miles limit. That position might have been all right when there were no transport facilities and when there were no education authorities prepared to make the necessary provision for the conveyance of such children to school. But I submit, where the education authorities make provision to convey children to school who are outside the three-miles limit, the provisions of this old Act ought not to be considered a legitimate excuse for not sending those children to school. I know that as a result of our discussions with the Department, and as a result of our discussions inside the Executive of the education authorities a promise has been made by the Department, and, I understand, by the Secretary of State for Scotland, very seriously and favourably to consider the proposed amendment of the existing law in order to get the education authorities out of the difficulties in which they find themselves at the present time. I should like to know what action the Department are prepared to take now in connection with that particular case, because,
although the case was taken to the higher Court, the higher Court, as far as I understand, simply confirmed the decision of the lower Court. We can do nothing as education authorities, if parents object to send children to school who are outside the three-miles limit, but allow the children to run wild.
I wish to raise two most important questions affecting us in Scotland at the present time. We have made some improvement in organisation and administration during the last three or four years in particular, but there is still one class of people for which no proper provision is being made in our schools. I refer to the over-age pupils—the type of children who may be normal, but who, because of the circumstances of their parents, may have been removed from district to district and have had no real opportunity for receiving the same education as children whose parents have been in ordinary occupation and have been resident in one district practically during the whole of their children's school life. Some amazing figures are provided in this Report to which I have already referred—figures dealing with the number of children who, reaching 14 years of age, have not passed the qualifying examination and have not received any form of advanced or secondary education. I think the number is approximately 37,000–37,000 who left school at the first leaving age after 14 years of age and who have not reached the stage beyond the senior division. I think it is a waste of effort on the part of teachers, and it is not providing the right type of education when they are kept in a class, for instance, where children of 10 or 11 years of age have reached the same stage of education. Our teachers are doing their best, and the ratepayers and the nation are spending money on the provision of a kind of education from which such children are unable to benefit.
The claim I make, so far as these particular children are concerned, is that when they reach the age of 12½years or 13 years, instead of being kept in the senior division in the school, they should be sent up to the advanced division central schools, not to receive the advanced education there but to receive the practical and manual instruction which is provided in these schools, education by hand and eye, by which they can
benefit themselves, instead of wasting the time of the teachers in the senior division in the elementary schools and really keeping back the progress of other children in the same classes. The Secretary of State and the Department should press upon education authorities in Scotland the need for centralising all pupils beyond a given age, say 13, in these advanced division courses, or in the secondary schools if they are going on with their secondary education. The point I want to emphasise is this, that you make provision for the supervising the health of the child, for the training of the child and the control of the child, up to the age of 14 years, but you make no provision for the years between 14 and 16. After 16 the young person, if employed, will come under the National Health Insurance Act and, if unemployed, under the unemployment schemes, but for the period between 14 and 16 years of age no provision is made for the control of children who leave school at the age of 14 and who find no employment.
From a return given by the Secretary for Mines in reply to a question in the House I find that between 1921–2 and 1925–6 no less than 457,299 children left our schools, and there are hundreds and thousands of those children who have not yet found work. It is one of the greatest tragedies of the life of our nation that young persons of 14 should be leaving school without any prospects of employment, should be going about our streets without any control, and no arrangements made for their education, except the continuation classes, of which, unfortunately, only a few of our pupils take advantage. This is one of the problems we have to deal with in connection with national education administration. Surely something can be done. I understand that one of the recommendations of the special Committee which was set up by the Secretary of State to inquire into the relationship between education and the employment of young persons is that no child shall be allowed to leave school at 14 years of age unless he or she can produce a certificate that he or she is going to employment. I know the difficulties in connection with this. It would be most difficult for education authorities to prepare proper schemes and most difficult to carry them through, and I think the best way would be for the Secretary
of State to exercise the powers he has, fix an appointed day, raise the age to 15, and give full power to education authorities, in cases of necessity, to make an adequate maintenance allowance. It would be far better to pay 5s. a week, 7s. 6d. or 10s. a week in maintenance allowance between the ages of 14 and 15 to those children whose parents require such assistance rather than allow the mass of our children to leave school without any provision being made for them in any shape or form.
If we could raise the school age to 15 years of age it would make the problem far easier, so far as educational administration is concerned. In many instances children enter for the three years' course in our advanced schools, but whenever they can get provided with work at 14 years of age, although you have the necessary organisation and a proper scheme of education to allow them every chance of gaining a higher school certificate, they leave this education course. Consequently you have wasted part of the efforts of the staff, the money of the ratepayers, and a part of the national expenditure. By raising the age to 15 you will enable 90 per cent. of those who enter for the three years' course to get the full benefit of that instruction rather than the limited number who now receive that benefit. If we can provide the money necessary for cruisers we can provide the money necessary to provide maintenance grants and allow the children to get the three years' education in the advanced division course. There is one other question I desire to refer to. Despite the appeals of last year, and the year before, we have still nobody in Scotland who is directly responsible for agricultural education. You have still the two bodies. There is the Board of Agriculture, and if we ask for any assistance in connection with special schemes for agricultural training they tell us that they cannot help us. Then there is the Education Department. They have not complete control in connection with agricultural education. I think the time has arrived when education in Scotland, whether it is general education or agricultural education, ought to be under the control of one authority, and that authority ought to be the Scottish Board of Education.
I should like to see special schemes for training young persons in agricultural matters. I know the orthodox education administration talks about giving a rural bias in connection with rural education. I want to see the rural bias given in connection with the education of the urban population. It would be a wise policy, so far as Scottish educational administration is concerned, if we spent some money in training young persons between the ages of 14 and 16 years in our urban areas on agricultural subjects; giving them an agricultural training and bias. The tragedy of Scottish rural life is that the very type of individual you want to keep on the land, the agricultural labourer, is the very type who emigrates. We make no special provisions for training the child of the miner, or the engineer, or the general worker, in our urban areas in these rural subjects, This would be a real benefit to the nation, because if we still have to face the emigration of the agricultural labourer, it would give the agricultural districts a call on a trained, or partly trained, youth in our nation, who would know more about agricultural problems than they do at the present time. These are the chief points I want to put before the Committee. We have ideals in connection with education. There are many of us on these benches who have had very limited opportunities for education. I left school at 13 because they would not let me leave at 12, and I am determined that my children and my children's children shall at least have better opportunities for education than their parents or their grandparents.
Education, a good education, gets out of the child all that is best in the child. It should develop all the finer characteristics and attributes of the pupil. The only way to do that effectually is by reducing the size of classes. From a return giving the size of classes I find that while there are only six authorities in Scotland which have classes exceeding 60, there are a very large number of these classes under the Glasgow education authority. It is a tragedy that this should be so in Glasgow, with all its wealth. Glasgow claims that it pays its teachers more than any other authority, but it is making those payments at the expense of the teachers, because if you give a teacher a class of more than 60 children, it means that you are not doing justice either to
the teacher or the pupil. In Glasgow, at the present time, there are 20 classes with more than 60 pupils, and more than 1,000 classes with between 50 and 60 pupils each. With classes as large as that you cannot get the best out of your children or your teachers, or get the best return for the money expended.
I know the Department are calling on education authorities to take such steps that in 1928 or 1929 all classes shall be less than 50, and I trust they will speed up that good work, and be as harsh as possible so far as Glasgow is concerned. It has all the wealth that is necessary to build new schools, and there can be no real objection to reducing the size of the classes. I have met their administrators and I know that they put forward all kinds of objections against reducing the size of the classes, but I have never heard one really sensible reason given. In our schemes of education and our methods of organisation and administration we ought to try to draw out the best that is in the children and to develop all the best characteristics of our race; teaching the children to be self-reliant, teaching them the spirit of independence, teaching them initiative and, above all things, teaching them that in the future they are going to be the citizens of this country and will have to think for themselves and weigh up the problems of life for themselves; and these things they can only do if we give them the best education possible.

9.0 p.m.

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I would like to stress the point which has been put to the Secretary of State for Scotland as to the importance of giving a rural bias to the education in industrial centres. That ought to be seriously considered by the Department, because in my opinion it would help us to solve many of our difficulties with regard to finding employment for our people. It is a point which I have made before, and I would like to emphasise it to-night. I rose, however, to address the Committee on another point, and in this connection I would remark that I notice that the Opposition always claim that they represent the working class and that we, on this side, do not. Why they should make such a claim I do not understand, because I feel that we on this side as truly voice the views of the people of the country as
they do. To-night I want to voice the feeling of a large number of people in my constituency, and not only in my constituency but throughout Scotland, that we are not getting the best results out of our education system. There is a strong feeling that in view of the money we are spending—it is something like £10,000,000 in Scotland this year—the results ought to be better, and I want to suggest how the Department might use its weight in order to improve conditions.
What we suffer from is the failure to concentrate on improving the primary schools of the country. We hear a great deal, especially from the Opposition side, about secondary education, higher education and continuation classes, but the cause of the primary schools is largely overlooked. It is no use pleading for secondary education and continuation classes unless we give our children the best education possible from the moment they come to school. They must be put on the right lines at the start, otherwise they will not be able to benefit by the instruction provided in the higher divisions. I think that is the most important thing we have to do in our schools. In this connection I would appeal for smaller classes. In my view the need for smaller classes is much more urgent in the primary schools than in the secondary schools. I notice from this Report that in the primary schools the average number of children is 36 per class, in the secondary schools the average is 25, and in the special classes it is 18. It would be more to the advantage of the country if the average were 18 or 20 in the lower classes of the primary schools, so that children might receive more individual attention at the outset of their school life, in order to put them on the right road. The highest paid teachers are nearly always found in the higher schools, and in a way that is natural; but more ought to be done for the primary school teachers. We need the very best teaching we can procure for our children; it needs a highly skilled person to teach small children properly.
Another point brought out by this Report is that the reason why we are not getting the best return for our money is, largely, the failure to give sufficient attention to practical forms of training. There is too much academic training, and
we need more of a practical bias in our teaching. Another point is that the subjects taught are too numerous, and that there is not enough concentration on one or two subjects. As is stated on page 12 of the Report:
Educationally it is better to do a little well than a great deal indifferently or badly.
I am afraid that many things in connection with education are indifferently or badly done. In the first place we want fewer subjects and we want them better done. It has been pointed out on page 11 and page 7 of the Report that there are too many different subjects and the tendency is towards academic subjects rather than practical subjects. I hope the Secretary for Scotland will consider these criticisms. Why do we not have more of these practical subjects? I think the teaching profession attaches far too much weight to academic subjects in their training of the children. I think the teachers themselves are trained far too much in this direction, and they receive far too much academic training to enable them to give a sound practical training to the children.
Another point of view I would like to impress upon hon. Members is the necessity of the parents taking a greater interest in the education of their children. I have the greatest admiration for the teaching profession, and they do a most noble work, but I am not quite sure that they all realise that the parents ought to be brought in to the scheme of education. The teachers are rather too apt to consider that once a child goes to school the parents should be put on one side, and I think that is a very serious thing. I heard a speech delivered the other day by the headmaster of a large preparatory school dealing with the question of education, and he said that the one thing he appealed to parents to remember was that it was impossible for the schoolmaster to train children successfully unless the parents collaborated with him in his work. Under our present educational system the parents are not allowed enough latitude in this direction, and the teachers think that the parents ought not to be allowed to do anything in this direction. I think the future success of our educational system
depends very largely upon the extent to which parents co-operate with the education authorities.
The whole trouble has been that recently there has been a tendency to take away the power of the parents over their children to encourage them to take an interest in their education. If a little more power was given to the parents I think we should very soon find that they would be only too pleased to co-operate with the teachers in order to see what would be the best policy for educating the children. At the present time, when parents suggest a more or less practical form of training, the teachers are apt to turn round and say: "You are not doing the best for your child, and you are not giving him all the advantages which our system offers; you compel your child to go into industry too soon instead of joining some higher profession."
Consequently, the parents feel that they do not want to stand in the way of the education of their children, and they decide that the teachers are better able to judge in regard to this matter. I am sure that policy is not always the best for the children, and it would be much better if the teachers would co-operate more with the parents. In that way I think education would be very much improved, and the large amount of money we are spending on education would be used to a better advantage. On these points I appeal to the Education Department because the matter rests in their hands. They have the power to carry out these suggestions in many ways without any further legislation, and I know I should be out of order in suggesting legislation at this point. I do feel, however, that under the present Education Acts in Scotland more could be done to improve our primary education, and if we can put more efforts into that branch of education, I am sure we should find that the superstructure of secondary education would be much more improved and would ultimately be more for the benefit of the people of Scotland.

Mr. COWAN: The hon. Member for Peebles (Mr. Westwood) with his wide knowledge of administration in educational matters has put before the Committee
some questions which call for early and serious consideration. I was particularly interested in the speech to which we have just listened from the hon. Member for Central Aberdeen (Mr. Smith) who has had a very considerable experience of educational matters in Scotland. No one has any objection to a system which secures the greatest possible improvement in our elementary schools, but at the very best elementary schools can only give very little help in the direction of qualifying children to face the problems of life at the age of 14.
There are one or two aspects of the educational problem in Scotland which I will put before the Committee and which I suggest for the consideration of the Education Department. It was with very special pleasure that I heard the announcement by the Secretary of State for Scotland that he intended to put into operation to a certain extent the principle of a reduction in the number attending the classes. That will entail some alteration in regard to the provision of accommodation, and I am afraid that certain local authorities will not be able to meet their obligations as regards accommodation. Nevertheless, I hope there will be no slackening on the part of the Department in reference to those authorities in default making every possible preparation.
With regard to the question of the raising of the school age, I do not think that very much preparation will be required. I think that on this particular question in recent years, there has been an almost unprecedented change in public opinion with regard to the necessity of raising the school age and this applies not only to the industrial side but more particularly to the social and the educational side. We already possess a most extended franchise, and we propose to extend it still further. Do the Members of this Committee think that young girls leaving school at 14 without having had any opportunity of studying political questions are fully qualified to exercise the franchise? I think that the policy of the Education Department ought to be something like the policy which was adumbrated by the President of the Board of Education who said that he had asked the various authorities in England to make a survey as to the necessities of the case before
the proposal to raise the school age is carried out. With regard to primary education I am somewhat at variance with the hon. Member for Aberdeen and Kincardine Central (Mr. R. W. Smith) because I think that the work of our elementary schools is as good as it can be made under existing circumstances. In some cases the circumstances are not favourable and the buildings are not favourable.

Mr. BUCHANAN: They are shocking.

Mr. COWAN: The classes are too large, and the teachers in many cases are overworked, and the conditions undermine their health. Those conditions cannot lead to good results. On the whole, I think we in Scotland have reason to be proud of our elementary schools. That is a matter of common agreement. It would be a slur on the good name of Scotland, with all its proud educational traditions, if its elementary schools to-day were not reasonably proficient. It may be said, with regard to educational matters in Scotland, that differences of opinion arise only on two occasions, firstly, when some part of the existing machinery or curriculum is scrapped, and secondly, when some new proposal is introduced. The latest educational innovation has been the introduction of the advanced division. I must apologise to Members of the Committee if from time to time I have to use rather technical terms of that sort, and I may explain that the advanced division is meant to give something in the nature of a parallel course and an equally useful course, in relation to what used to be called the pure secondary course. It is considered that there are pupils for whom a classical or language course is not the best possible course, and the idea of the advanced division is to provide a parallel course, not necessarily an inferior course, but one which will better suit the aptitude of the particular child concerned. We have only two sources of information on the progress of educational matters in Scotland. The first is in the Reports of His Majesty's Inspectors, and the second is in the opinions of the teachers as expressed at their meetings. At the present time, the advanced division is upon its trial, and we must see that there is nothing shoddy about it, and that it is, in its way, as real an educational tendency as the secondary course hitherto has been.
There is one matter on which I think the people of Scotland have no reason to pride themselves. If I understand aright, there are no exemptions from school attendance under the age of 14 in England, but in Scotland, we have, in many parts, exemptions at the age of 11 or 12, particularly in the North of Scotland. I trust that the Department will exercise a restraining influence upon the authorities who indulge in that practice. If I may now turn to what is, in one sense, a more cheerful subject, namely, the training of teachers, I wish to say that we find in the most informative and interesting Report issued by the Education Department, that the number of graduates is increasing. There will be this year a larger number of graduates issuing from the training colleges than has ever been the case. Not only is that a very promising symptom of educational progress, but it gives an opportunity to the Department for considering certain other questions. In view of the surplus of teachers which we are having this year, it might now be possible to lengthen the course of training. The requirements of to-day are much greater than the requirements of yesterday, and, if Scotland is to keep its place in the van of educational progress, it is absolutely necessary that we should have the most highly qualified teachers. It is a rather extraordinary thing that all the teachers who go into training colleges every year—and there are many hundreds of them—seem to be about perfect when they enter. Unlike almost any other profession, in the case of the teaching profession there is scarcely one who fails to come out as a fully qualified teacher; and I ask the Department to consider whether we are not allowing some to pass through our training colleges who are not fully qualified to enter our schools and instruct our children.
I do not wish to take up more time than I can fairly claim, but there is another point arising out of the training of teachers to which I would direct attention. The teachers have already some representation upon the provincial committees under whom the training colleges are carried on. The work of the training colleges is purely on the side of that training which will best fit the teacher for his or her work. It has nothing to do with the finance of education, or the
emoluments of the teacher. I think it would be a very valuable element in the composition of the provincial committees if there was some increase in the representation of the teaching profession, so that it might amount to something like one-third, or at least one-fourth of the total membership of each committee. Another matter which does not come directly under the purview of the Secretary of State, as head of the Scottish Education Department, might also be mentioned. The right hon. Gentleman, being also head of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, might find it possible to secure for the teachers representation upon the advisory committees which have to deal with the teaching of agriculture in our schools. In the Department's Report I find regret expressed that agriculture is not receiving the attention which it might receive. It may or may not be that this is a case of cause and effect, as between the representation or non-representation of teachers on the advisory bodies. I think some representation of this kind, either through the authorities under the Act or by making some small alteration in the Act itself, would strengthen the position of these advisory committees and bring into them some people with particular knowledge of the schools.
The Secretary of State for Scotland might also use his influence with another Department in regard to a point about teachers' pensions. Some of the older teachers tell me that their pensions are still of a very meagre amount, and that they find it rather difficult to make ends meet when the instalments of the pension are paid only once a quarter. They would like the Secretary of State to make some representation to the Paymaster-General as to the system of payment. It is right that there should be some difference of opinion in regard to policy between the Department responsible for education and outsiders, such as teachers, and those connected with administration, and the ordinary members of the public, but I should like to say, as one who has had a long and close association with the work of education, and a good many communications with the Education Department, that whatever differences of opinion exist there cannot be any question as to the virility and efficiency of that Department. There must be from all who have come in contact
with it, an appreciation of the courtesy with which every representation is received.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I cannot agree with that statement.

Mr. COWAN: It may be that one speaks from one experience, and another from another experience, but I think credit is due to the Department and I say that as one who has differed from them as strongly as any member of this Committee.

Mr. KIDD: I wonder if I can enlist sympathy for the efforts of teachers, particularly in our country board schools, towards inspiring a very much keener interest in athletics than we have had in our school life in Scotland at any time? Every man has his own education subjects on which he believes himself to be a critic. It is treated almost like art in that respect. Rightly or wrongly, I take the view that the whole object of education is to enable us to forget ourselves. The great danger of the present time is that the virility of Scotsmen should be largely lost by the kind of training which makes them brood unduly upon themselves, and gives them an entirely wrong view of what is meant by education. I can conceive no more pathetic figure than the boy who is nourished on this subject and that and who is stuffed with so-called learning very much as a goose is prepared for Christmas, who is regarded at home with the admiration extended only to one who is a kind of marvel and who, as he passes into life, seems to think that the realisation of education should be the discovery of a soft job, or what appears to him to be a soft job, with a biggish salary and perfect security—a good salary to begin with and then the exchanging of that salary for a good pension. The boy who goes into life on that basis and who thinks that he is thereby realising every purpose of education and the whole purpose for which the money on his education was spent, is a most pathetic figure. We want to get back somehow or other to the spirit of adventure.
Only the other night we listened to a very inspiring speech by the Secretary of State for the Dominions. What is the good of our talking about Empire Trade
Boards, or links of Empire, or trying to visualise all the possibilities of the British Commonwealth, if here at home we cultivate a type which is lacking in that spirit of adventure which gave us the Empire? For the very spirit which secured the Empire is the spirit which must be maintained in order to retain that Empire. For that reason I want especially to appeal to the Minister to help teachers—and I know of plenty who are doing their best in the country schools—to give the boys the feeling that the perfect boy is not the boy who is best in Latin or French or may have a mastery of Pons asinorum that his neighbour has not got, but the boy who discovers that character is the thing that matters. There is no better agency in promoting the character of the boy than the agency afforded by the rugger field, the soccer field or the cricket field. There are a discipline and a training on this field which are being encouraged by many head masters, and are being splendidly supported by the teachers in the Board schools in many parts of Scotland. I appeal to the Minister to bring before the Department the great advantage from the national and Imperial point of view of the development of character which is thus provided, and, therefore, as far as possible to give if need be material encouragement to those who are trying to inspire that fine spirit.

Mr. HARDIE: The last speaker, if I may say so, has brought up what has always been attendant on any discussion of educational matters. What he was doing is just what all other generations of those who do not think clearly about education have always done. They always say that of course the present generation of boys and girls is always less worthy than those of their generation. That is an absolute hallucination. Why should we have this reflection on the part of parents and an attempt to decry their progeny? I have no doubt at all about the children of the generation we are speaking of now. They are as good as any generation of the past if they get a chance.
I want to deal to-night briefly with the question of education and the gap between the ages of 14 and 16, which is the most serious thing that has to be faced. Education of youth can only be
accomplished by continuity. I think that will be agreed by anyone who knows anything about education. The moment you allow a break in the youthful mind, you not only destroy what has been given before the break, but you destroy the whole tendency and desire to acquire knowledge by that youthful mind. That is the most serious thing you have got to face—destroying what was given, and destroying the mental tendency towards the further acquisition of knowledge.
No one can face this question seriously without coming to the conclusion that theme must be no gap. I can see all that might be pictured by despondent minds as resulting from the gap. Surely a Government which claims to be the greatest Government of modern times will realise that education is the real basis of citizenship and when you destroy, by the gap, the basic ideal of the citizen, what do you do? You give an irresponsibility to the child mind between 14 and 16 and then when it comes to 16 you try to put into that mind, when you have destroyed what ought to have been there, a responsibility through the Employment Exchange. We get Members in this House telling how certain boys and girls who, in receipt of money from the Employment Exchange, are handicapped in this direction, and they always forget that the cause of anything that may be wrong is due to the lack of continuity in education. That is my point. I ask the Government to realise that the gap is costing more to the nation in reality than would be the expense of continuation education. We had not long ago in this House the President of the Board of Education seeming to suggest that of course the economic line of demarcation would require to be brought into consideration in determining education and its cost. He was trying to explain that where there were certain pupils who could not be considered as being able to take advantage of real secondary education, a new scheme might be available whereby the supposedly defective child should get to some other school where it would not be a secondary education but some advanced curriculum. What is the use of anyone, especially one who presumes to take charge of education in this country, talking such flat nonsense? Because that is what it amounts to.
Every thinking man and woman knows that although there may be something
latent in the mind of a child, not fully developed, children are not of the same mentality at the same age; they develop at different periods and ages. If a child is dull compared with its fellows, that is no reason why it should be given less education, it is a reason why it should be given more and more education. It would seem that the idea of the Minister of Education is that when you find the child not developing along the average, as it is called, in the school, you must still further make it dull, until you make it mentally defective. So far as Scotland is concerned we shall fight against any imposition such as that, and it will be a new method of fighting so far as education is concerned.
Where you allow a gap you destroy the education. One hon. Member, from one of the North of Scotland constituencies, asked the Committee to consider the point of view of the parent. What is the point of view of the average parent in regard to education? The hon. Member raised that question, but he did not answer it. Parents realise that at a certain age a child must go to school. When the child has gone through school, the idea as to what is to be the vocation of the child begins to assert itself in the minds of the teacher and the parent. If it were only an educational point of view, the point of view of the parent—I am speaking from experience derived from interviewing parents—would be one point of view. Every parent would want to see his or her children getting the highest education in the land. What, then, is the use of bringing forward a term such as "the parents' point of view," when you have these facts entering into the parents' points of view? The economic circumstances of the home come in and determine the educational point of view on the practical side. We on these benches know parents who would like to give their sons and daughters a university education, but the earning capacity of the household determines exactly how much or how little education the children are going to get. That, really, is not the parent's point of view, and anyone who dares to introduce at any time the argument that the parents are indifferent, that they have no ideas of education—I speak from long experience in contact with the citizens of Glasgow—is wrong.
I ask the Secretary of State for Scotland to consider what is meant by the gap between the ages of 14 and 16. If you take the school returns of Glasgow, which show the numbers of children who are leaving the schools and then consult the register at the Employment Exchanges, and you take the trouble to ascertain what has happened, you will find out exactly what has taken place in connection with the cases at the Employment Exchange. What has happened in regard to the evening continuation school classes? In the days when a child was assured of work and of being able to attend evening classes, there was a continuity of education, but the same conditions do not obtain to-day, because a break has been allowed to take place. You do not find something for the child to do during the day between the ages of 14 and 16. In that way you break the continuity. I have much more to say, but I will conclude because others wish to speak. There is nothing more serious in our education system than the gap. The highest general education that can be given to a youth makes him more capable to absorb whatever vocational training he is going to get. If we are to remain a great nation we must have the highest general education before we begin vocational training, and if we do that, every vocation will be filled with honour and ability, and with the best possible advantage to the nation.

Mr. W. M. WATSON: The facts of the case which I wish to bring before the notice of the Secretary of State for Scotland are pretty well known to him. He has received deputations on the subject, and I agree with the hon. Member for Peebles (Mr. Westwood) who expressed disappointment that the right hon. Gentleman had not seen his way to meet the Fife Education Authority on the matter. When the industrial trouble began last year there were certain of our local authorities that were expected to do something in order to relieve the distress that was caused by the dispute. The Education authority and the parish councils were charged with that duty during the time that the industrial dispute was in progress. We who belong to the County of Fife have made representations to the Secretary of State for Scotland because we consider that the
Fife Education Authority has been badly let down. I do not know exactly by whom.
It will surprise my colleagues from Scotland to know that Fife is evidently going to come out of this matter worse than any other county engaged in that conflict. We are supposed to be fly and to know how to arrange our business, but up to now we have been unable to get the Secretary of State to look at this matter as we see it in the County of Fife. In other counties involved in that conflict the education authorities took up the position that it was not their duty to feed and clothe necessitous children. In these areas the parish councils were compelled, or, at any rate, if they were not compelled, it was looked upon as their duty to perform that particular function, but in the county of Fife certain parish councils refused to feed necessitous children, and the education authorities took on that responsibility in the hope that, before the conflict had gone far, the parish councils would recognise their duty and be prepared to do it. Unfortunately, the months went on, without some of these parish councils making any effort to perform this duty, with the result that in the seven months of that conflict responsibility which should have been on the parish councils was thrown on the shoulders of the Fife Education Authority. It means that our education authority in Fife is saddled with an expenditure of something approaching £79,000, the greater proportion of which ought to have been expended by parish councils.
The way we have been let down is this: If the parish council had shouldered that responsibility, and had made the expenditure, they would have been reimbursed to the extent of 40 per cent. of their expenditure. But because the education authority has taken on its shoulders responsibility for feeding and clothing these children, the ratepayers in our county will have to meet the whole of that bill. That is a very serious matter for the county of Fife, because it is an area in which there has been a considerable amount of unemployment for a considerable period, and where the depression in our leading industries is very great. I do not require to tell the Secretary of State the condition of affairs in our county, because he is familiar with
it. It is unfortunate that in the county of Fife the education authority should have been left in that position. It will mean that for years to come ratepayers in that county will have to face the expenditure which they should not have been required to meet, had parish councils taken their responsibility on their shoulders.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Peebles pointed out, there is another anomaly in connection with this matter. The parish councils refused to do what was looked upon as their duty, for it was their duty according to the circular sent from the Scottish Board of Health. The parish councils which refused were really acting within the law, and the parish councils that made the payments to wives and children of those engaged in the conflict were really breaking the law. That is a most extraordinary situation, and the Members of the county of Fife have interviewed the Secretary of State several times, but, up till now, he has been unable to see in what particular direction he can assist us. He says we cannot have money from the education fund, because that would be unfair to other counties. But we replied that we did not care from where the money came, but we considered this expenditure in which our education authority was involved should not be borne by the Fife ratepayers, but should be partly borne by the Government. I think we have a claim to at least a proportion of the £79,000 which is reimbursed to the extent of 40 per cent. That will be given to parish councils in other parts of Scotland. From the Fife point of view, that is a burning question. We regret very much our education authority are bridled in that particular way, because we are particularly pleased with our education authority. We look on them as one of the progressive authorities. They have done a good many things to give a lead in education. I hope even yet the Secretary of State may see his way to be able to assist the education authority in our county.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I want to raise a question which I have been putting for some time, namely, the provision of schools in Glasgow, and the continuation and use of certain schools that should not be continued. The question of the
size of classes in Scotland is also a matter I want to raise. Certain figures which the Secretary of State for Scotland gave to me show that the position in Glasgow as compared with any other town in the West of Scotland or any other part of Scotland is alarming. I find that whereas in Edinburgh the average number of children attending classes in the schools is 38, in Glasgow it is 47, while in Perth it is 24, in Dundee 30 and in Aberdeen 39. Glasgow is in a very much worse position comparatively than any other town. I got from the right hon. Gentleman's colleague the President of the Board of Education a set of figures for Leicester, Liverpool and Manchester, and these bear out the same thing, that Glasgow is in a much worse plight as far as attendance at school is concerned than any other town.
The main point I wish to raise is that the whole reason for this is that schools cannot be provided. In other words, there is a shortage of schools. The question is not easy of solution. There is the difficulty of negotiation with other authorities, but surely there is this point that can be taken into consideration. Certain schools are being at present occupied. Take Greenside Street in the South side of Glasgow, which has been the subject of inquiry on many occasions by the Department as a school which might be likened to a slum-house. The London-Glasgow trains pass almost adjacent to it. Political meetings are sometimes held in this school, and even politicians, with all the hubbub of an election, find it difficult to conduct those meetings because of the noise of the trains. It is admitted by every person that the school ought to be abolished. Nobody defends it. In connection with the National Playing Fields Association, certain people met in Scotland last week to try to get more money for the development of playing fields. The school has practically no place for a playground. The playground, which is misnamed, is the public street, in which the Glasgow Corporation, to its credit, has made a smooth pavement. That is really the only place in which the children have to play and, with the development of motor traffic, it is very undesirable that they should do so. Here is a school with practically no playground and, worse than that, with no public park adjacent, the nearest one being between one and two miles away. That renders
it almost impossible for the teachers to take their children there. The schoolrooms and the whole building are indefensible, and the Ministry's own inspector has condemned it.
There may be trouble in providing new school accommodation, in view of the demand for houses. It is possible, however, that many of the men who would be employed in building schools are not necessarily the same men who would build the houses. But let that point go. I ask, can nothing be done where schools are very bad, as in the case of the Greenside Street school, and others, at least to provide concrete buildings that could be rapidly put up to tide over the difficulty? Is there nothing that can be done to provide alternative buildings—they might not necessarily be permanent buildings—which at least would take the children away from their present surroundings and give them a better chance? I notice that the Minister of Labour, when he finds it impossible, owing to certain circumstances, to erect an Employment Exchange, provides temporary buildings for the purpose. Those buildings are not all that could be desired, but they are a considerable improvement on those to which the clerks and claimants were going before. If that can be done in regard to the Exchanges, it should not be impossible in the case of slum schools, which are worse than slum Employment Exchanges, where children are not properly cared for, and where there is no playing space at all. In such buildings accommodation could be provided for a year or two, and the children could thus be given decent surroundings. Glasgow seems to be in a worse position than any other place. Negotiations have been going on with the Scottish Education Secretary and the Glasgow Education Authority for years. It is almost hopeless, and nothing seems to be done. The Education Authority are not providing the school, but I am quite certain that if the schools to which I have referred were in the West End of Glasgow they would not be tolerated. There are no slum schools in Dennistoun, Shawlands or Hillhead; there are nothing but up-to-date schools. I ask the Secretary of State, if he cannot overcome this difficulty permanently, to take some steps to close the worst schools and
to provide reasonable sanitary accommodation for the children, and so to ensure that the money we are spending on education in these schools is not all wasted.

10.0 p.m.

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: I do not profess to be an expert on this particular subject, but my memory carries me back to the days when I left school. At that time, the conviction was held by quite a large number of people in Scotland and, I believe, by people on this side of the Tweed as well, that Scottish people were very keen on education. My experience was that the people who had control of the industries of the country, of the administration and of the laws were of the opinion that only a certain amount of education was good for the children of the working classes. We, on this side of the Committee, look at the matter from a different standpoint from that of hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side. We believe that our children should get a thorough education, that they should get a university education, and that the State should pay for that education. We are convinced that in the long run that will be a very good investment for the State. We are strongly convinced that our children are as entitled to a good and superior education as are the children of the hon. Gentlemen opposite. I do not know anyone sitting on the other side who would propose to send his boy, at 14 years of age, to work in a coal mine, or his girl into a factory. These hon. Members consider that their children should go on and on at school until they go right through the university. That explains to some extent the point which was in the mind of the hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) when he drew attention to the question of continuity. Hon. Members opposite believe that education should be continued until the mind is fully developed. They do not worry whether the boys should be "rugger" players or "soccer" players, or any other kind of players; they want them to be in a position to secure the very best advantages they can in view of the struggle they will have to face when they go out into the world. Our children are very much handicapped—they are handicapped deliberately—by the hon. Gentlemen representing the party of capitalism, who sit largely on the other side of the Committee. Those hon. Gentlemen think
that at 14 years of age a youngster should be compelled to leave school. They do not say that he should be compelled to leave, but that the wages of his father should be so low that the parent has no alternative but to send the child to work. When I was a boy, grown men and women believed that it was quite right that their children should go to work at 10 or 11 years of age. They have been got gradually to realise the advantage of an educational career for a somewhat longer period, and now we have reached 14 years of age. The Scottish Education Department—I am sure the English Education Department will be in the same position—are having representations made to them, drawing their attention to the fact that there is no employment for boys and girls at 14 years of age. The bulk of the boys and girls leaving school to-day, in industrial areas particularly, cannot find employment, and are running wild in the streets. Whatever little advantage they had from the education which they received up to 14 years of age is being lost more quickly than it was gained.
I put it to the Secretary for Scotland that the time has come for the Government seriously to consider the wisdom of supplying sufficient money to enable the children to be educated until their 16th or 17th year. I know it will be somewhat difficult to get the Secretary for Scotland to agree. He might agree in theory, he might be sympathetic, and I do not doubt that he is; but behind him there is the Department, which holds up the money, and education cannot be got without money. That seems to create a feeling of unreality in a discussion of this sort, in the present circumstances. If we had any assurance that the Scottish Education Department could get sufficient money, then the will and desire of 99 per cent. of the ordinary working-class population in Scotland—and, I should say, in England—would be that their children should get an education that would develop their qualities to the very fullest extent. The hon. Member for Springburn referred to the question of the dull boy. He referred to the necessity for the dull boy having more attention paid to him than has hitherto been the case. I believe that there is an hon. and distinguished Member of this House who has ventured the opinion that probably the only genius, or one of the only geniuses, that Scotland
has produced was Sir Walter Scott. I do not know much about Sir Walter Scott, though I have read that he was an extremely dull boy, but he happened to be born a member of the middle-class. If he had been born a member of the working-class he would not have been a genius. Nobody in this Committee can tell how many geniuses are being lost to this country. Nobody can say how much wealth is being wasted because of the faulty system of education in operation. I am concerned about this matter, because I feel that the custom which is being followed on leaving school at 14 and then not finding employment gets the young people into ways that will not, in the long run, redound to the advantage or the credit of this country.
I think it is the business of the State and this House to approach this question not from partisan standpoint at all, but from the point of view of men who are anxious to do their very best for the generations that are coming up after them. It is no use talking nonsense about the spread of the Empire. Every one of us wants to see the Empire great and good. There is no more desire on the other side to see the Empire expanding both ethically and economically than there is on this side. We can assume that we are all equally anxious on that point, and, surely, the educated girl or boy going out to the Colonies is a very much better investment to the Colonies than one who has not got that education. Surely it would not be to the disadvantage of the State to spend a few million pounds annually in the better training of the young, particularly when we find ourselves unable to provide employment for them.
I do sincerely hope that the Secretary of State for Scotland will take this matter up, not in any partisan way at all, and not merely with the desire of getting something for Scotland that the people of England are not getting. We are arguing for both. We can only deal with Scottish business here to-night, but the claim that is being made for the child of the working man in Scotland is a claim that will be as sound and will be as strongly made from these benches for the child of the working man in England. Money cannot be better spent than in giving our children a better education. Glasgow is not the only
place where there is a lack of accommodation. My own county is bad enough, and I think the other countries are bad enough, and in the industrial areas also the school teachers are very considerably cramped in their work. It is impossible for them to do their best, and it is equally impossible for them to get their best from their pupils, largely because there is too much asked from them. I would urge on the Secretary of State the wisdom of trying to get the country to realise that the time has come when some forward move might be made along the lines of extending the age, and of providing the necessary facilities for giving children a very much better education than they have been able to get up to the present.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I wish to return to the same point that I raised at an earlier stage in this Debate, and that is in regard to the material welfare of the children who attend school. It is apparent, from the evidence that has been adduced to-day, that my colleagues have been better and more humanely dealt with than I was when I was before the Board of Education in Edinburgh. They have praised the treatment meted out to them, whereas I submitted to-day that they were harsh in their treatment of the education authority in Dumbartonshire. I want to appeal to the Secretary of State for Scotland in regard to this specific case. At the moment it has gone, because of the climatic conditions. It is now summer, and it does not matter whether the children going to the school are infants or not, but it matters very considerably that they have to go bare-footed to school in the dead of winter. We have got away from the idea that it was a happy child that went bare-footed in winter time. People used to make our forefathers believe that it was an evidence that the scholars were hardy, and that that was why the children went bare-footed.
My experience, and the experience of all my colleagues and of every member of the working classes, is that bare feet in the winter time mean bare stomachs as well. It is utterly impossible for teachers, no matter how able they may be, and given all the outstanding ability of which Scottish teachers are possessed,
to inculcate wisdom into children that are starving. There is no getting away from the fact that children that are going badly shod are going badly red and badly clad. My appeal is this. I want the Secretary of State for Scotland to take time by the forelock and to see to it that the same thing does not occur this winter as happened last winter. There were 700 children going bare-footed to school in the winter time. It is no salve to the conscience of the Secretary of State for Scotland to say that it was not his fault, that it was a "thraw," as we say in Scotland, between the particular authorities whose duty it was to provide the boots. It was his duty, and I said so at the deputation in Edinburgh. He is responsible to this country for the health of the children, and he should see to it that those children are shod. Then he should have seen whose duty it was to pay for the boots. But the children should be attended to first. I hope he will see that the like does not happen again.
It is no fault of the children. My quarrel is with the permanent officials in Scotland at that time. I am sorry to say our experience is that we get far better treatment at headquarters here in London than we do in Edinburgh. The permanent officials tried to suggest that it was only a particular school, and they tried to put it into the mind of the Secretary of State for Scotland that it was a particular colour of religion that was affected; but the deputation, who were not Socialists, who were not even Labour men, were able to prove conclusively to the Secretary of State that it was not confined to one school or to one religion, but that it comprised all, particularly in Clydebank, Dumbarton, and the Vale of Leven—the places where the workers work and where the money is made, but not where the money is retained. I want the Secretary of State to remember that this charge has been made a local charge, handicapping the local people, whereas it should have been made a national charge, because the wealth that is produced in the Valley of the Clyde, as in the case of all industrial centres, is diffused over the whole country, and, when unemployment comes along, the burden should be distributed over the whole nation.
My contention is that we are not asking too much of the Secretary of State for Scotland as far as my constituency
is concerned, because there the children will stand comparison with the best in the British Isles as far as sticking to their lessons is concerned, and as far as their parents are concerned in striving and making terrible sacrifices in order that their sons may be better men than their fathers ever will be, in order that their daughters may be better educated than they have ever been. These are the thoughts and ideas which inspire and carry on the women of the working class. I hear a voice coming quietly over the House, saying, "Individual effort." Yes, individual effort, but you see how individual effort is requited. There they are, the mothers, starving—[Interruption.] I know he is an Englishman, but you have to pay attention to him. There you have the mothers of the Scottish boys and girls, who are prepared to starve if necessary in order that their children may get a better chance in life than they have had. No one knows it better than the Secretary of State for Scotland, and, therefore, he should do all that he possibly can. He ought to use all his influence. We are not begging; we are not coming here cap in hand; we believe it is his duty, and we believe it is our duty to stand here and remind him of his duty. He will forget it; he will run away from it. Even Nelson had to draw attention at the Battle of Trafalgar to the fact that
England expects that every man this day will do his duty.
Therefore, although they squirm, and although those on the benches behind them try to put us down, all that we are doing here is simply doing our duty by the people who sent us here. They sent us here to do this, and no one has any right to stand between us and the Secretary of State for Scotland when we are putting him through it and he does not do his duty.
He knows perfectly well what will happen to the children during this coming winter. I am anxious about the winter that is coming on. We never make provision beforehand, but, when we are in the midst of it, the Secretary of State for Scotland is harassed. Deputations come to him and report that the children are not coming to school, that the inspector has been sent to make inquiries and see why they are not coming to school, and that the inspector has reported to the education authority that
it is because the children have not been fed, because they are not clad. I am not exaggerating the case one little bit. These are facts and
Facts are chiels that winna ding
And daurna be disputed.
That being the case, I want to appeal to the Secretary of State to take steps at the earliest possible moment to see to it that the children, not only in my constituency but all over Scotland, will have a guarantee, as far as it is humanly possible in his power, that they will not be kept back from school because their fathers have not the wherewithal to feed them. Think of the wages paid in the shipyards on the Clyde. They are the real explanation of the poverty and misery that exist. We have been speaking of housing and we are now talking of education. It all brings us back to the poverty problem. Here is a people famed the world over for their anxiety to educate their children. It is being made more difficult than ever. It is harder for the mothers to-day to educate and feed their children than it was for the mothers who went before them. That is a terrible thing to say at this time, when there is more wealth and this is a richer country than it has ever been at any other time. On an average 36 shillings a week—

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is getting a little far from the duties and powers of the Secretary of State in the matter of education.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I have no desire to fall foul of you, Sir. I fell foul of your apprentice, and I would be the last man in the world to make it awkward for anyone who was in the Chair for the first time, though I have done that in my day and generation. I am anxious to get a little concession for dear old Scotland. I should not require to make these appeals to the Secretary of State, because it is his primary business to look after the welfare of the children of the working-class. If you do not have a well educated, well fed, well clad working-class your country is on the downgrade. The reason I am appealing is that I feel that Scotland is on the downgrade.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member must apply himself to something within the power, administratively, of the Secretary of State for Scotland to do. If he
can show that the right hon. Gentleman is in fault in some way he is in order in keeping him up to it, but it must be something that is within his power.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Thanks, Mr. Hope; thank you for the word. It nerves my heart, and steels my soul. The point I am making is, that the Secretary of State for Scotland has the power—he has more power now than he had when he came into office because he is a Secretary of State—to feed those children. That is my point. He has the power, if he cares to exercise it, to clothe those children. That means to put clothes on them, and boots. I was going on to show the inadequacy of the wages that are paid to what is commonly called the labourer, the unskilled labourer. We Socialists do not believe that there is such a thing as unskilled labour. All labour is skilled, and those who do not work are the individuals who are not skilled, and we are not interested in them. I am appealing on behalf of those children, for I know perfectly well—I have it on my conscience—that unless I succeed in wringing some sort of concession from the Secretary of State for Scotland, there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of children who will have to go to school in Scotland during the coming winter without food, without clothing, practically speaking, and with bare feet. The Secretary of State can avoid that, and I ask him if he will give me an assurance that he will do all that his office empowers him to do to safeguard the interests of these children.

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: I shall not keep the Committee for more than a minute or two. It is always a little difficult to follow the mental processes of the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down. To-night, I think, even the hon. Gentleman himself must realise that in his speech there was no mental process whatever—at least no logical mental process. The idea at the bottom of his speech seemed to be, that parents were worse placed as regards educational facilities for children than the parents in previous years. But, really, to hear the hon. Member talk, one would imagine that the parents were paving for the education of their children. [Interruption.] Let me assure the hon. Gentleman that education is free to the children to whom he has referred.
He talked about boots for children and about leaving their stomachs empty. I understand that the reason for the trouble with regard to boots was due to local trouble between the education authority and the local authority. If the hon. Member would devote his energy and ability to trying to compose these differences, instead of coming here and wasting the time of the Committee, as he has in the remarks he has just made, I think he would be better employed.
In regard to the question of education generally, I agree, and I suppose that all Members of this, Committee agree, that educational facilities ought to be at the disposal of all classes equally, as far as it is possible within the resources of the country. We in Scotland, who are proud of our system of education, realise that while it was the most prized possession of the country a few generations ago, it is not so to-day. It is idle for hon. Members opposite to contend that, generally speaking, it is prized by Scotsmen in the way it was a few generations back. In those days the fathers and mothers of Scotland were indeed doing what the hon. Member for Dumbarton says they are doing to-day; they did indeed starve themselves in order to give their children a good education. We honour them for it. But it is not so now. The education is given by the State, and I say that it is more than questionable whether parents who get the education of their children free to-day value it as much as parents did a generation ago, who had to starve and stint themselves in order to provide it for their children. I do not say that we should go back upon the road, or halt upon the road in our endeavour to keep open all avenues of education to the children of the country. The point is that with a limited amount of money expenditure should not be indiscriminate, but selective. That is a point which hon. Members opposite leave entirely alone, but it is a point upon which I hope we shall get some information from the Government. The hon. Member for Dumbarton in his speech referred to the phrase of Nelson:
England expects that every man this day will do his duty.
What I am afraid of in Scotland, in regard to education, is that some Scottish men and women are expecting the State to do their duty to their children.

Mr. MAXTON: I have listened to the hon. and gallant Member and I feel rather like saying that it comes very ill from him to rebuke the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) for his illogical processes of thought, because with the best will in the world I have been unable to follow the processes of thought of the hon. Member for Dumfries (Brigadier-General Charteris), and the only reason why I refrain from rebuking him is because it is quite possible when I have sat down he will be unable to follow mine. It behoves us all to walk very humbly in the sight of the Lord and in the sight of the Chair. The class to which the hon. and gallant Member belongs in Scotland was so proud of Scottish education that they invariably sent their sons across the borders to have them educated.

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: If the hon. Member is referring to me, I may say that I was educated entirely in Scotland.

Mr. MAXTON: I venture to say that the later polish must have been put on in England. We do not produce such results in Scotland. There is a certain rugged grandeur produced by our educational methods which are not produced anywhere else. I do not wish to stand between the Committee and the very adequate reply from the Secretary of State to the various points raised for more than a minute or two, but I want to obtrude on his notice one or two points which have not yet been mentioned. I should like to know whether he can inform the House as to what has taken place in Kincardine with regard to the approach made by the education authorities in that area for permission to pass by-laws enabling farmers to employ children of 10 years of age in agricultural work at certain seasons of the year. As he knows, that is a matter in which I was very much interested, because I was greatly shocked that any education authority should approach him to ask for powers to turn children of 10 years of age out to work in the fields at a time when so many adult agricultural workers are unemployed, and I hope he has refused permission for these by-laws to be put into operation.
He is probably aware that the education authority of the city which he and
the Under-Secretary and I all try to represent in our own rather inadequate but different ways has for a year or two now done a very laudable work in arranging for a very large proportion of the poorer children to have a holiday in the country parts of Scotland. The education authority has taken the responsibility of arranging that a certain number of children attending its schools shall get out into a summer holiday camp. The funds raised for that purpose have been raised largely by voluntary effort, which has meant a desperate scramble amongst all sorts of people and the use of all sorts of devices, and while the object to be achieved is a worthy one, and one of which practically everyone approves, the methods by which the money has had to be raised have not met with the approval of all sections of the citizens of Glasgow. I want him to consider whether it is not within his power under present legislation to permit some proportion of the Scottish Education Fund to be devoted to the provision of a summer holiday for those children in city slums schools who are unable to get a holiday by any other means.
He is probably well aware that the City of Glasgow has to take the responsibility for about two-thirds of all the physically-defective children in the whole of Scotland, and about two-thirds, also, of all the mentally-defective children. Such a big proportion of certified physical defectives and of certified mental defectives is a very good indication that a very high percentage of young children are in such social conditions as tend to drive them into the condition of physical or mental defectives. The most valuable function the State can perform it not merely to provide adequate attention for children who have become mentally or physically defective but to take steps, such as the provision of a holiday camp, to prevent any more children from becoming mentally or physically unfit. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to examine his powers to see whether it is not possible for him to recognise expenditure on this object as legitimate expenditure.
Another matter which I wish to raise does not concern solely the education authority, but is one which I understand has to be considered in collaboration with the Ministry of Labour, because the Ministry
of Labour provides a big proportion of the money, though the work is actually carried through by the education authority. I am referring to the classes run by juvenile advisory committees for unemployed young people. I understand some of these pupils are sent to these centres by Employment Exchanges, the Unemployment Insurance fund paying 5s. a week as maintenance allowance for any child or young person attending one of these courses. I understand that a certain number come from the parish councils. In reply to a question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), we were told that there has been a very considerable decrease during the last 12 months in the number of people in attendance at these centres. I agree that, to some extent, the trouble is almost wholly due to the policy of the Ministry of Labour, but I think the Education Department could do something to develop and stimulate attendances at these classes.
I have had an opportunity of seeing the work done at these places. I believe that in those classes we are saving a very large proportion of the intellectual and moral wreckage amongst the adolescents in our big cities, and I would like the Secretary of State for Scotland to give his personal attention to the unemployed adolescent whose only opportunity for education has come through the institution of these classes. I understand that the number of those attending the classes is declining numerically, and I would like the right hon. Gentleman to see if he cannot do something to stimulate the Ministry of Labour to encourage rather than to retard those classes. I notice that the Secretary of State for Scotland does not appear to be so alarmed about the lapse of time as I would like him to be, and I conclude from his attitude that the less time I leave him to reply the happier he will be. I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman to give me a figure which is rather incomplete in the Report of the Board of Education, and which I feel quite sure he will have in his possession.
There is a very interesting tabulation showing the decline of births in Scotland, and indicating that even in a few years time within five years from now our school population will be considerably less than it is to-day. The figures are given up to. 1925 and half of 1926.
The half for 1926 snows that while in a bad year 1919–20, the number of births in Scotland was 133,900; in 1925–26 it had fallen to 104,000, or a drop of about 30,000 children in the potential school population. In the year 1926, for the half year that is given, we have only got 49,000, and if the other half of the year bears out the figures for the first half of the year, then the total will only be about 100,000 children born in Scotland, which is the lowest figure we have had for a very long time, and this will create a very different situation in our public schools. I would like the Secretary of State for Scotland to deal with those points in his reply, and I apologise for having left the right hon. Gentleman such a very short time to reply.

Sir J. GILMOUR: The hon. Gentleman who has just sat down hinted that I should be glad not to have a great deal of time to reply on this subject. I have always endeavoured to be honest with my colleagues from Scotland, and I confess that I approach this subject of education and the many difficult problems which arise out of it with very great diffidence. I think I should be amply justified in that attitude from the nature of the Debate to which we have listened to-day. I have heard a variety of statements made, some of which, I frankly say, I think are greatly exaggerated. On the one hand, we have been told that Scotland is rapidly declining and falling into a state which, I am sure, we shall all be sorry to see. On the other hand, we have been told that there are many thousands of children in Scotland going barefooted without sufficient clothing and without sufficient food. That there are many difficult problems, and that some of these call for the closest attention from the House of Commons I do not deny. But what is the real truth as to the progress which we are making in education? Whatever our differences of opinion may be as to this or that method of approaching this problem, those who know most about it and who follow it most closely will agree that, even if the progress has not been so rapid, or if some of the difficulties which have been apparent in these post-War years have not been overcome as rapidly as we would wish, yet it is certain that we are making material and satisfactory progress.
Reference has been made to the problem of the size of the classes. That
is a problem which has been aggravated by the after-effects of the War. In the city of Glasgow, in which some hon. Members who have spoken to-night are greatly interested, the great problem has been the difficulty of finding sufficient money to build schools and to expand as quickly as we would desire. The suggestion has been made that in order to overcome some of these difficulties temporary buildings might be erected. The policy of the Department has been to endeavour to turn the attention of those who are building new schools, not so much to external decoration and splendid frontages as to the capacity and suitability of the buildings for teaching purposes, and to keep them as economical and plain as possible. It is satisfactory to know that the authorities in Glasgow at the present time are adopting the suggestion of erecting temporary school buildings. In view of the circumstances of a city which is extending so rapidly, and in so many directions as Glasgow, with shifting populations, it is right and proper that such a policy should be adopted. The hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) has asked me a question about the fall in the school population. It is quite true that there has been a striking fall—something like 45,000—in the last five years. That has a material bearing when an education authority is taking into its purview the possibility of fresh building operations. I feel constrained to say that while Glasgow presents one of the most difficult problems which we have to face, we are at present pressing that authority to deal with that problem as rapidly as possible. The officers of the Department are, I understand, making a close survey, not of the general scheme, but of individual schemes, and I assure hon. Members who have a particular interest in certain schools, which are admittedly bad and have been condemned for a number of years, that so far as my Department and I are concerned, we shall do everything in our power to expedite the necessary steps for dealing with that question.
Then there is the difficult question of the linking up of rural education with the present school education, and of interesting not only the school teachers and education authorities but the parents and the children themselves in that side of education. I have listened with interest
to some of the suggestions made to-night as to how the teachers' interest might be aroused in that problem, and I can assure hon. Members that those suggestions will receive our careful attention. I should like to say that, in so far as co-operation between the school authorities and agricultural colleges is concerned, I think we are making progress, and that we may hope to see a definite development of that work. Then there is the very interesting and, as I think, essential problem of teaching the young people to use their hands in mechanical operations in the schools. That is a side of education which will also not be lost sight of.
Some reference was made by some hon. Members to the problem of playing fields. It is quite certain that the stimulating of interest in the provision of suitable and safe playing grounds for the children in connection with all these schools is a matter of great national importance. At the present time, there is a very interesting movement in connection with the endeavour to get more playing fields, but I am glad to say that, apart from that and purely in connection with the Education Department, we have made in Scotland during the last year very material progress in obtaining suitable playing grounds. The hon. Member for Peebles (Mr. Westwood) asked me what was being done about the exchange of teachers, and stressed the importance, in the view of the teaching profession, of this exchange. There has been in this country quite recently a very important conference, attended by representatives from the Dominions and overseas, who have been discussing with the authorities here at home the difficulties which arise in connection with their problems, and we have been exchanging our views with them, There has been a special committee sitting, and I trust that one of the results which may come out of that will be the stimulation of interest and an increasing exchange of visits and views and experience.
Among other problems which I know interest hon. Members on all sides of the Committee is that of finding some means of carrying on the education of the children a little further than we do at the present time. That is a question which must claim, from time to time, the closest attention of any Government or any party, but I would say to hon.
Members on that matter that we must move with some sense of proportion as to the possibility of development. We are reaching now the stage when in 1928 we hope definitely to see a reduction in the size of the classes. That will entail, of course, extension of premises, and no doubt eventually expansion of the teaching staffs, but it seems to me until we have achieved the preliminary steps, it would be folly to attempt to take the larger step, not only for the reason that we have not got the accommodation or the facilities, but because of the fact that if we are going to make that step we must have in our minds very clearly how we are going to develop the kind of teaching that we are going to give to those in the further stages. That has to be most carefully considered and developed before it is possible to take a step which hon. Members in all quarters of the House have very much at heart.
Some questions were asked about the relief to children, particularly in the county of Fife. I happen to belong to that county, and if I could have, in any reasonable measure, met the difficult circumstances which I recognise existed for the education authority in my own county, I should undoubtedly have done so; but I must say quite plainly to the Committee, as I have said to those hon. Members who came on deputations to me, that I can only do things if I feel that I am not inflicting greater difficulties and greater injuries in other parts of the country. Some hon. Members have told me that all they asked for was a special grant. Special grants are so easy to speak of, but I am constrained to say that I think we in Scotland have had our share of special grants, and I do not think that I should have been justified in any way in asking for a further special grant. I very regretfully say that I am unable to meet the demands that have been made upon me.

Mr. MAXTON: Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that Scotland has had more than her fair share of the revenue expended?

Mr. T. KENNEDY: Does the right hon. Gentleman know that special grants have gone to authorities that broke the law and are denied to authorities that observed the law?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I am aware of all the circumstances, and I have had to weigh most carefully all the factors involved. My decision has been given, and I am bound to say that I must adhere to it. I was asked questions about children living more than three miles from a school. My Department has been in communication with the Association of Education Authorities and others on this matter, and I hope that any difficulties which may have arisen in the past over that problem will no longer take place. I do not know whether I have answered all the questions that were put to me.

Mr. MAXTON: Kincardineshire.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: What about Dumbartonshire?

Sir J. GILMOUR: In regard to Dumbartonshire, I do not think I can say more than that I will have the most careful inquiries made. I was under the impression that any kind of difficulty such as that which the hon. Member indicated might arise in the coming winter was very unlikely under the present circumstances, but I repeat that I will have very careful inquiries made. The duties to which the hon. Member referred are duties of the local authorities, and in so far as I am able to strengthen those local authorities I shall do so. In regard to the question which the hon. Member for Bridgeton put to me about Kincardineshire, I cannot charge my memory at the moment as to the exact position, but I do not think that the situation is any different now from what it was some time ago.

It being Eleven of the Clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.

Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next, 25th July; Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

ISLE OF MAN (CUSTOMS) BILL.

Order for Second Reading read.

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Ronald McNeill): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
This is an annual Bill that comes before this Parliament merely as a matter
of formality, and it is usually passed without any discussion or debate, but in case any hon. Member is unfamiliar with this particular annual Bill, I will endeavour to explain what it is. The Isle of Man has its own Legislature and its own powers of taxation and it is specially provided in an old Act of Parliament that the Customs and Excise adopted by the Legislature in the Isle of Man is subject formally to confirmation by the Imperial Parliament. That is in this Bill which is presented as a formality.

Mr. KELLY: While there has been some explanation of this Measure, I should like to know whether these particular Clauses in the way now presented to us have been before the Manx Legislature, and whether they have been before the two Houses of that place. I would also like to ask, with regard to Clause 15, whether it is usual, as a power handed to the Governor of that island, that if he thinks fit he may exempt any of these articles from the charges set down in this particular Measure? While asking this question, I have only one other thing to say, that I am surprised at the Members of the Manx Parliament, some of whom I know very well, if they have accepted comfortably and without criticism many of the impositions that will be imposed upon them by this particular Measure. It seems strange that they should accept for their own people what we have objected to in this House for our own people. I would like to know if the right hon. Gentleman can tell us whether there has been any opposition to many of these charges which will be imposed upon the Manx people by this Bill.

Mr. MCNEILL: I am afraid I am not able to give the hon. Gentleman all the information he asks for. The Bill undoubtedly was passed by the Manx Legislature. I have not inquired, and I have no information as to whether it was passed with or without opposition. I did not think that it was any business of mine, nor, I would suggest, any business of this House, to inquire as to the amount of opposition which was encountered in the passage of this Bill. With regard to Clause 15, about which the hon. Gentleman asked for some information, I am afraid that I am not able to give him that information, because I did not think it necessary to
inform myself of any details with regard to this legislation, which, as I say, is quite formal. But I will endeavour to obtain for him the information for which he asks before the Bill comes into operation. I hope that will be satisfactory to him.

GAS REGULATION ACT, 1920.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Earl-Shilton Gas-Light and Coke Company, Limited, which was presented on the 11th July and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Exeter Gaslight and Coke Company, which was presented on the 11th July and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Mayor, Aldermen, Burgesses of the borough of Richmond, in the county of York, which was presented on the 7th July and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the St. Ives (Hunts) Gas Company, Limited, which was presented on the 8th July and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Basingstoke Gas Company, which was presented on the 27th June and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Stroud Gaslight and Coke Company, which was presented on the 5th July and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Ipswich Gas Light Company, which was presented on the 8th July and published, be approved.

Resolved,
That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under Section 10 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920, on the application of the Redditch Gas Company, which was presented on the 11th July and published, be approved, subject to the addition of the following Clause:

For protection of the Warwickshire County Council.)

The following provision for the protection of the Warwickshire County Council (in this Section referred to as "the county council") shall, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing between the company and the county council, apply and have effect (that is to say):

Section eight of the Gasworks Clauses Act, 1847, incorporated with this Order
shall be read and have effect as if in respect of any street, bridge, sewer, drain, or tunnel under the control or management of the county council the period of fourteen clear days were inserted therein instead of the period of three clear days in the said Section mentioned and the notice therein mentioned shall be given to the surveyor of the county council:

Provided that this Section shall not apply in the case of any opening or breaking up for the purpose of laying, connecting, or repairing consumers' service pipes."—[Sir Burton Chadwick.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved,, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Commander Eyres Monsell.]

Adjourned accordingly at Nine Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.